Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 patch

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Davies [mailto:de...@gm...] 
Sent: Monday 20 September 2010 11:57
To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 patch

I kind of like the idea of having half-hexes to plug onto the top/side
of the map from an aesthetic point of view, however, in terms of time
spend, I think it might end up being more worthwhile being able to
define edges that are 'safe' for pointing track into (and that
automatically act as a terminus of 0 value perhaps?

I'm not sure how tricky that is, of course, but it would sidestep the
issue of even needing these extra fake hexes anyway.

[EV] Yes, that shouldn't be too difficult. I'll try it out one of these
days.

> And I would prefer if everything related to the formationOrderIndex is
kept in
> the subclass PublicCompany_1825, as it is only used by those.
> I am usually confused by variables in a base class, which are only used in
> subclass context.

There was a reason I had to put it in the interface, although this is
probably largely due to a lack of coding skill on my part...

Oh yeah, in OperatingRound_1825, line 23:

for (PublicCompanyI company : companyManager.getAllPublicCompanies()) {

If you make that foreach loop PublicCompany_125 then
getAllPublicCompanies doesn't work because that returns a collections
of PublicCompanyI objects.  There is likely a better way to fix this
than putting that information into the interface class so if so I'm
happy to be corrected!

[EV] I already wondered why you needed this interface. I will try to sort
out if we can omit it.