Some issues with materials side report

[Peter Garrone <pgarrone at acay dot com dot au>]

Hi,

I cant say these issues are bugs, because the code I sent in was
not inadvertently changed to this. I am attempting to lay out
my objections, why I think the code was changed, and why i dont agree.

1) Report layout.

The heading is excessively compressed, and the numbers are jammed together.
The heading, on my display, looks like

Materialupply Prodapac

This sort of thing makes the game look like it lacks polish and finish.
Think of the impression this makes on a casual user compared to a legible
heading. I think the code was changed to this because having something
readable takes up too much room.

However my argument to this would
be that the experienced user keeps the whole report hidden anyway, and
only draws it out every several turns to decide on production priorities.
Having something well laid out and intelligible makes a great impression
on casual users. Conversly, a jumble of numbers is a natural turnoff.

2) Materials report capacity.

For games with "infinite" capacity, the percentage reports as
the digit zero, e.g. advances and coral sea. 
It was blank in the code I sent in.

If a newish user sees 0 for capacity, (provided they
worked out what "apac" meant, of course),
it would have an alarming affect.
So the 0 is misleading.

It should be either blank or "NA" for Not Applicable.

I think the main issue was the rejection retroactively of the use of
9999 as an infinite capacity.
At the time I suppose I could have challenged this, though I didnt,
so I am raising this issue again. What exactly is the problem here?
The principles as I see them are:
- A report should not be misleading. 
- Game development usage should not be changed retroactively.
- A slight programming inconvenience is of lesser importance than the prior items.