On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 15:52:52 +0100 [email protected] wrote: > I was trying to improve how rivers are handled by the > map editor, which currently is annoying to use. > It seems that TileImprovement.updateRiverConnections > got 3 conflicting uses requiring different handling. > 1. right click on a land tile without river to add > a river in map editor, where it should probably > autoconnect to neighboring tiles
Through add/removeRiver. This is indeed the primary use. > 2. setting a river style through the RiverStyleDialog > in map editor, where it should just --set-- the > selected style Agreed. We probably need a simpler setRiver. The current code has the benefit of at least trying to maintain continuity. This is helpful but not vital IMHO. So if autoconnection is proving troublesome I do not object if you drop it, or perhaps highlight discontinuities? > 3. TileImprovement.checkIntegrity where some 0.10.5 > compatibility code tries to validate if there are > wrong connections between river and road tiles > For 3. I need to know how these old maps were bugged. I doubt anyone recalls that any more. The compatibility code was probably written for 0.10.0 and moved around (back then I was less careful to be sure that the 0.x.y annotations were added). The only hint will be in remaining compatibility code and by rolling back versions. Do you really need to know? AFAICT checkIntegrity is effectively checking that the given style is correct in the new format and possibly replacing it if not, almost as if placing a new river on the tile, as in #1. > For the map editor, I think I will change both river > buttons in the panel to work like the other buttons > in that a right click is just adding or removing > the improvement and not annoyingly opening the dialog > for choosing the style every click into a rivertile. > Then I'd add a separate button for choosing a style, > where I then open the river style dialog, without > the delete button inside it. I think this is sensible. > There I would like to know, is it permissible to > set combined river styles like 1012? Currently > such styles get silently ignored and transformed > into something like 1011 or 2022, which I find > unintuitive and limiting. Do we have art for this? If not, that may be the reason it was not implemented. That or Col1 compatibility. Generally I prefer to see fewer restrictions, so this makes sense to me. Cheers, Mike Pope
pgpJybWBOS3Ke.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ Freecol-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
