See my comments below
BTW I am doing some training, I hope this will not interfere. Once it is
merged, I will re-train too..
Diff comments:
>
> === modified file 'src/ai/defaultai.cc'
> --- src/ai/defaultai.cc 2019-05-17 11:45:39 +0000
> +++ src/ai/defaultai.cc 2019-05-18 13:37:09 +0000
> @@ -2489,21 +2499,25 @@
>
> // Now verifying that all 'buildable' buildings has
> positive max_needed_preciousness
> // if they have outputs, all other must have zero
> max_needed_preciousness
> - if ((bo.new_building == BuildingNecessity::kNeeded ||
> - bo.new_building == BuildingNecessity::kForced ||
> - bo.new_building == BuildingNecessity::kAllowed ||
> - bo.new_building ==
> BuildingNecessity::kNeededPending) &&
> - (!bo.outputs.empty() ||
> bo.is(BuildingAttribute::kBarracks))) {
> - if (bo.max_needed_preciousness <= 0) {
> - throw wexception("AI: Max presciousness
> must not be <= 0 for building: %s",
> -
> bo.desc->name().c_str());
> - }
> - } else if (bo.new_building ==
> BuildingNecessity::kForbidden) {
> +
> + if (bo.new_building == BuildingNecessity::kForbidden) {
> bo.max_needed_preciousness = 0;
> } else {
> - // For other situations we make sure
> max_needed_preciousness is zero
> -
> - assert(bo.max_needed_preciousness == 0);
> + bo.max_needed_preciousness =
> std::max(bo.max_needed_preciousness, bo.initial_preciousness);
> + bo.max_preciousness =
> std::max(bo.max_preciousness, bo.initial_preciousness);
> + if ((bo.new_building ==
> BuildingNecessity::kNeeded ||
> + bo.new_building ==
> BuildingNecessity::kForced ||
> + bo.new_building ==
> BuildingNecessity::kAllowed ||
> + bo.new_building ==
> BuildingNecessity::kNeededPending) &&
> + (!bo.outputs.empty() ||
> bo.is(BuildingAttribute::kBarracks))) {
> + if (bo.max_needed_preciousness <= 0) {
> + throw wexception("AI: Max
> presciousness must not be <= 0 for building: %s",
> +
> bo.desc->name().c_str());
> + }
> + } else {
> + // For other situations we make sure
> max_needed_preciousness is zero
> + // NOCOM this fails for recruitment
> sites now assert(bo.max_needed_preciousness == 0);
This assert?
See comment few lines above:
// Now verifying that all 'buildable' buildings has
positive max_needed_preciousness
// if they have outputs, all other must have zero
max_needed_preciousness
Also note the line:
(!bo.outputs.empty() || bo.is(BuildingAttribute::kBarracks))
So you should add recruitements sites here too (the same exemptions as
barracks), what do you think?
> + }
> }
>
> // Positive max_needed_preciousness says a building
> type is needed
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~widelands-dev/widelands/bug-1829471-worker-preciousness/+merge/367608
Your team Widelands Developers is requested to review the proposed merge of
lp:~widelands-dev/widelands/bug-1829471-worker-preciousness into lp:widelands.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~widelands-dev
Post to : widelands-dev@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~widelands-dev
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
