Re: Possible bug in side_can_research

[Lincoln Peters <sampln at sbcglobal dot net>]

On Fri, 2004-09-10 at 19:45, Eric McDonald wrote:
> Lincoln Peters wrote:
> 
> > When I re-wrote ai_plan_research, I had assumed that the
> > side_can_research function would return false for advances that have
> > already been researched.  However, having run advances.g several times
> 
> That should be the case, and seems to do exactly that in the places it 
> is used in the new side research code in the SDL UI. I am surprised that 
> it is causing you problems.

So maybe there's a logic error in the new ai_plan_research function that
produces an effect comparable to a logic error in side_can_research? 
It's certainly possible.

> 
> > Would it be reasonable to modify side_can_research so that it returns
> > false for advances that the side already has?  Or would it be better to
> > place the necessary code in ai_plan_research instead?
> 
> Actually, there is a function to update the research vector and it gets 
> called whenever a topic is actually researched in the kernel run code.

I'm a bit unclear on this.  Do you mean that it selects a new advance to
research at the beginning of every turn?  I'd say that such behavior is
rather inefficient.

---
Lincoln Peters
<sampln@sbcglobal.net>

There's a way out of any cage.
		-- Captain Christopher Pike, "The Menagerie" ("The Cage"),
		   stardate unknown.