Re: [Rails-devel] [Rails-commits] rails/ui

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

See below (and there is also a question for Stefan Frey at the bottom).

>I have fixed current player highlighting in the StatusWindow. I have not changed the player order (which I understand is what you >really want), because that is not so easy to do.  I may work on that later.
> 
In the meantime i played around a bit on my own, the UI-Code is based on some "static" behaviour regarding player ordering that might not be true all the time.

[EV] In the Game status window, the bits to handle changes player ordering already existed (playerIndex, getCurrentPlayer() and highlightCurrentPlayer()), but unfortunately I had forgotten to use these...   
I'm not sure to what extent StartRoundWindow is currently prepared for different player orders.  Certainly it can (or could??) handle the reverse bidding sequences in the  1835 Snake and Clemens Variants.

>I also will look at the StartRoundWindow later. One aspect I want to think about is if it’s right to sell the privates and the investors >in the same StartRound, or that that round can better be split.
> 
Might be an Idea to have two Startpacket being handled consecutivly, would need to check the code and of course rewrite the existing behaviour once again :)(groan)

[EV] The main question is: is it easier to make StartRoundWindow cope with a changed player order *in the middle of a round*, or splitting the round?  Perhaps the former, but I haven't yet been able to dig into that issue.

Two questions that always arise in such cases are:
1.  Does "it" (in this case: multiple start rounds) also occur in other games? 1844 is very complex, but not sure if we would need multiple start rounds in that game.  Then we have 18US, where a second "start round" occurs later in the game.  I don't think we need to look at 1837 (however complex its start procedure is - it's much alike 1835). I'm not aware of other games where consecutive initial start rounds could apply, but I haven't been closely following the newest developments.
2. If so, is it worthwhile to create generic code for it? Probably not.

Here is a follow-up question for *Stefan Frey*:
In your perceived Round.xml, do you plan to include XML to configure the StartRound/SR/OR sequence (1/2/3 ORs per SR, etc.)? That's an idea that Brett and I have discussed many years ago, but I never got to writing code for it.  If you do, it might become simple to declare two consecutive StartRounds, and Martin's problem would be easier to solve.

Otherwise, the simplest solution might be to create a 1880-specific version of StartRoundWindow to handle this issue (a changed player order in the middle of a round).

Erik.