If player->simulation, produce_sect() must not change game state,
except for sct_updated. To avoid changing sectors, it copies each
sector's sct_item[] to a scratch buffer, and tracks new designation,
efficiency and available work in local variables.
Copy the complete sector to a scratch buffer instead. This is safer,
and will permit code simplifications.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
In Empire, even babies work.
neweff and production compute the projected population's work,
discarding fractions.
The update first computes the adults' work (discarding fractions),
then newborns' work (discarding fractions), then adds them together.
Double rounding. Moreover, it uses the old work percentage for the
adults' work, and the new one for the newborns' work. Broken in
Empire 3.
Fix by recomputing work after grow_people(). This is how things
worked before the regression. Also restores a bug: growfood()'s work
use is ignored. Harmless, because fcrate and fgrate are too low for
growfood() to produce anything, and nobody customizes them. Mark
FIXME anyway.
Update test output changes as expected: available work differs in
sectors where double rounding discards work, an in sectors with
changing work percentage.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The update kills people to enforce sector population limits, right
after growing people.
However, the population limit may decrease between that killing and
the end of the update:
* Research declines (only with RES_POP), but the lower population
limit isn't enforced. Even with an insanely fast decline of 60%
(level_age_rate = 1, etu_per_update = 60), the population limit
decreases by less than 10%.
Not applying the new level to this update is consistent with how we
use levels elsewhere.
* upd_buildeff() changes sector type and efficiency, but a lower new
population limit is enforced only when this changes the sector type
from big city to not big city (since option BIG_CITY was added in
Empire 2).
It isn't enforced on other sector type changes. Might change the
population limit since the type's limit became configurable in
commit 153527a (v4.2.20). Sane configurations don't let players
redesignate sectors to a type with different maximum population.
The server doesn't enforce this, though.
It isn't enforced when a big city's efficiency decreases, but sector
type change isn't achieved. Having population exceed the new limit
without having produced enough work to change the type seems
unlikely, as 25 will do even in the worst case, but should be
possible with a sufficiently low work percentage.
None of this is documented in info Update-sequence. Inconsistent
mess. Drop it.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Civilians, military and uw work only up to their sector's population
limit. The population limit depends on the sector type's maximum
population, research if RES_POP is enabled, and the sector's
efficiency for big cities.
The population limit may decrease between computation of work in
do_feed() and the end of the update:
* Research declines (only relevant with RES_POP). Work is not
corrected. The declined research will apply at the next update.
Since levels age after production is done, any work corrections
could only affect leftover available work. Wouldn't make sense.
The effect is negligible anyway. Even with an insanely fast decline
of 60% (level_age_rate = 1, etu_per_update = 60), the population
limit decreases by less than 10% in the worst case.
* upd_buildeff() changes sector type and efficiency. Work is
corrected only when this changes the sector type from big city to
not big city.
It isn't corrected on other sector type changes. These can affect
maximum population since the sector type's maximum became
configurable in commit 153527a (v4.2.20). Sane configurations don't
let players redesignate sectors to a type with different maximum
population. The server doesn't enforce this, though.
It isn't corrected when a big city's efficiency decreases, but
sector type change isn't achieved. Harmless, because tearing down a
city takes very little work (25 for 100%), so efficiency decrease
without type change means the work we have must be safely below any
sane population limit's work.
Good enough. However, the code implementing the work correction for
big cities is unclean. Get rid of it by tweaking the rules: a big
city's extra population does not work. City slickers, tsk, tsk, tsk.
At least they still pay their taxes.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Commit 5ba8cab (v4.2.20) replaced milit * 2 / 5.0 by milit * 0.4. Not
so smart; 0.4 isn't exact. Go back to milit / 2.5.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Tests need repeatable pseudo-random numbers to yield repeatable
results. Commit 73f1ac8 (v4.3.33) reseeds the PRNG with the count of
commands right before executing a command when running_test_suite is
on. This doesn't help the update: whenever update code exercised by a
test is changed to consume fewer or more PRNs, all subsequent users
get different numbers regardless. The ensuing test result changes are
extremely tedious to review.
To address this problem, reseed the PRNG in the update's two most
important loops with the iteration count when running_test_suite.
This way, the effect of perturbing the PRN sequence lasts only until
the next iteration.
There are many more loops, but reseeding in all of them seems
impractical.
Perturbs test results across the board. Hopefully, that'll happen
less frequently now.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Use a single array member instead of multiple scalar members. Only
the array elements that replace scalar members are can be non-zero for
now.
This is a first step to permitting more build materials.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The work required for build and repairs is traditionally a function of
build materials: 20 + lcm + 2*hcm for ships, planes and land units,
and (lcm + 2*hcm + oil + rad)/5 for nukes. Make it independently
configurable instead, via new ship-chr, plane-chr, land-chr, nuke-chr
selector bwork, backed by new struct mchrstr member m_bwork, struct
plchrstr member pl_bwork, struct lchrstr member l_bwork, struct
nchrstr member n_bwork. Keep the required work exactly the same for
now.
Clients that compute work from materials need to be updated. Easy,
since build work is now exposed in xdump.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
... when referring to a function's parameter or a struct/union's
member.
The idea of using FOO comes from the GNU coding standards:
The comment on a function is much clearer if you use the argument
names to speak about the argument values. The variable name
itself should be lower case, but write it in upper case when you
are speaking about the value rather than the variable itself.
Thus, "the inode number NODE_NUM" rather than "an inode".
Upcasing names is problematic for a case-sensitive language like C,
because it can create ambiguity. Moreover, it's too much shouting for
my taste.
GTK-Doc's convention to prefix the identifier with @ makes references
to variables stand out nicely. The rest of the GTK-Doc conventions
make no sense for us, however.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Don't use multiple calls of wu() to print a single line, because that
creates a separate telegram for each part. The read command normally
merges the telegrams, but if they are more than five seconds apart
(clock jumped somehow), we get a telegram header in the middle of a
line. Unlikely to happen, but clean it up anyway.
The misuse has always been there.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
SAIL has issues:
* Sail orders are executed at the update. Crafty players can use them
to get around the update window.
* The route is fixed at command time. You can't let the update find
the best route, like it does for distribution.
* The info pages documenting it amount to almost 100 non-blank lines
formatted. They claim you can follow friendly ships. This is
wrong. They also show incorrect follow syntax. Unlikely to be the
only errors.
* Few players use it. Makes it a nice hidey-hole for bugs. Here are
two nice ones:
- If follow's second argument is negative, the code attempts to
follow an uninitialized ship. Could well be a remote hole.
- If ship #1 follows #2 follows #3 follows #2, the update goes into
an infinite loop.
* It's more than 500 lines of rather crufty code nobody wants to
touch. Thanks to a big effort in Empire 2, it shares some code with
the navigation command. It still duplicates other navigation code.
The sharing complicates fixing the bugs demonstrated by
navi-march-test.
Reviewing, fixing and testing this mess isn't worth the opportunity
cost. Remove it instead. Drop commands follow, mquota, sail and
unsail. Drop ship selectors mquota, path, follow.
struct shpstr shrinks some more, on my system from 160 to 120 bytes.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The autonavigation feature has issues:
* Autonavigation orders are executed at the update. Crafty players
can use them to get around the update window.
* Usability is poor:
- The order command is overly complex, not least because it can do
five different things: clear, suspend, resume, declare route, set
cargo levels.
- Unlike every other command involving movement, order does not let
you specify routes, only destination sectors.
- Setting cargo levels can silently swap start and end point of a
circular route, because "this keeps the load_it() procedure
happy". Maybe it does, but it surely keeps players confused.
- Setting "start" cargo levels actually sets the "end" levels, and
vice versa. Has always been broken that way.
- Predicting what exactly autonavigation will do at the update isn't
easy.
* The info pages documenting it amount to almost 400 non-blank lines
formatted. They claim only merchant ships can be given orders.
This is wrong. Unlikely to be the only error.
* Few players use it, and its workings at the update a fairly opaque.
Makes it a nice hidey-hole for bugs. Here are two:
- Unlike the scuttle command, autonavigation happily scuttles trade
ships while they're on the trading block.
- Unlike the load command, autonavigation can load in friendly and
allied sectors.
* It's more than 700 lines of rather crufty code nobody wants to
touch. Thanks to a big effort in Empire 2, it shares code with the
navigation command. It still duplicates load code. The sharing
complicates fixing the bugs demonstrated by navi-march-test.
Reviewing, fixing and testing this mess isn't worth the opportunity
cost. Remove it instead. Drop commands order, qorder and sorder.
Drop ship selectors xstart, xend, ystart, yend, cargostart, cargoend,
amtstart, amtend, autonav.
xdump ship sheds almost half its columns. struct shpstr shrinks, on
my system from 200 to 160 bytes.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Commit d94d269 combined them into unit_put(), but that has turned out
not to be useful. Split them again.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Some callers have to second-guess shp_check_nav() to figure out
whether CN_LANDLOCKED means "too big to fit into the canal" or "can't
go there at all".
Fix that by returning d_navigation. CN_LANDLOCKED becomes either
NAV_CANAL or NAV_NONE, CN_CONSTRUCTION becomes either NAV_02 or
NAV_60, and CN_NAVIGABLE becomes NAVOK.
The CN_NAVIGABLE, ... codes are now unused. Drop them.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
TREATIES has issues:
* Treaties can cover attack, assault, paradrop, board, lboard, fire,
build (s|p|l|n) and enlist, but not bomb, launch, torpedo and
enlistment centers.
* Usability is very poor. While a treaty is in effect, every player
action that violates a treaty condition triggers a prompt like this:
This action is in contravention of treaty #0 (with Curmudgeon)
Do you wish to go ahead anyway? [yn]
If you decline, the action is not executed. If you accept, it is.
In both cases, your decision is reported in the news.
You cannot get rid of these prompts until the treaty expires.
* Virtually nobody uses them.
* Virtually unused code is buggy code. There is at least one race
condition: multifire() reads the firing sector, ship or land unit
before the treaty prompt, and writes it back after, triggering a
generation oops. Any updates made by other threads while trechk()
waits for input are wiped out, triggering a seqno mismatch oops.
* The treaty prompts could confuse smart clients that aren't prepared
for them. WinACE isn't, but is reported to work anyway at least
common usage. Ron Koenderink (the WinACE maintainer) suspects there
could be a few situations where it will fail.
This feature is not earning its keep. Remove it. Drop command
treaty, consider treaty, offer treaty, xdump treaty, reject treaties.
Output of accept changed, obviously.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
produce() limits production to how many units the workers can produce,
rounding randomly. It charges work for the units actually produced,
discarding fractions.
If you get lucky with the random rounding, you may get a bit of extra
work done for free. Else, you get to keep the unused work, and may
even be undercharged a tiny bit of work. Has always been that way.
The production command assumes the random rounding rounds up if and
only if the probability to do so is at least 50%. Thus, it's
frequently off by one for sectors producing at their worker limit.
The budget command runs the update code, and is therefore also off by
one, only differently.
Rather annoying for tech and research centers, where a single unit
matters. A tech center with full civilian population can produce 37.5
units in 60 etus. Given enough materials, it'll fluctuate between 37
and 38. Production consistently predicts 38, and budget randomly
predicts either 37 or 38. Both are off by one half the time.
Fix this as follows: limit production to the amount the workers can
produce (no rounding). Work becomes a hard limit, not subject to
random fluctuations. Randomly round the work charged for actual
production. On average, this charges exactly the work that's used.
More importantly, production and budget now predict how much gets
produced more accurately. They're still not exact, as the amount of
work available for production remains slightly random.
This also "fixes" the smoke test on a i686 Debian 6 box for me. The
root problem is that floating-point subexpressions may either be
computed in double precision or extended precision. Different
machines (or different compilers, or even different compiler flags)
may use different precision, and get different results.
Example: producing 108 units at one work per unit, sector p.e. 0.4
needs to charge 108 / 0.4 work. Computed in double precision, this
gets rounded to 270.0, then truncated to 270. In 80 bit extended
precision, it gets rounded to 269.999999999, then truncated to 269.
With random rounding instead of truncation, the probability for a
different result is vanishingly small. However, this commit
introduces truncation in another place. It just happens not to mess
up the smoke test there. I doubt this is the last time this kind of
problem upsets the smoke test.
We can make actual = roundavg(material_consume * prodeff) products.
When we reduce actual, we have to reduce material_consume, too. Code
does that like this:
material_consume = roundavg(actual' * material_consume / actual)
Double rounding. Do this instead:
material_consume = roundavg(actual' / prodeff)
Code dealing with money mixes int and long pretty haphazardly.
Harmless, because practical amounts of money fit into int on any
machine capable of running the server. Clean up anyway.
meltitems() computes #items * etus per update * fallout in type long.
Theoretical maximum is ITEM_MAX * etus * FALLOUT_MAX = 99980001 *
etus. Can overflow 32 bits for etus > 21. Has been broken since the
introduction of fallout in KSU.
Compute the product in double instead.
Code dealing with counting people mixes int and long pretty
haphazardly. Harmless, because practical populations fit into int
easily on any machine capable of running the server. Clean up anyway.
The call was added in 4.2.5 "so that the next telegram is flagged as
new and not part of the update". Since the update sends only
TEL_UPDATE telegrams (the previous commit restored that property), and
nothing else does, the next telegram is flagged as new automatically,
except when it's from the next update. Document that, and move the
call to a more natural place.
They didn't since commit 93d033cf, v4.3.26. Drawback: micromanagement
incentive to unload them for the update. Similar incentive has always
existed for military on ships.
Since the previous commit, land units loaded on land units get
unloaded when the carrier dies fighting che. Such land units get
stuck in the sector if the take over, and can be boarded. Doesn't
feel right, and increases the micromanagement incentive. Avoid by
letting them fight.
When che destroy a land unit, any embarked units remain stuck on their
now dead carrier. Closely related to and same impact as the bug fixed
in commit 8ccad0d7. Broken since Chainsaw 3 added land units.
The obvious fix would be to match what normally happens when a carrier
gets destroyed: destroy the cargo. Requires recursion. To keep
things as simple as possible, destroy plane cargo, but unload land
unit cargo. That way, the only cargo of cargo to visit are nukes on
planes.
Unloading the land units creates another problem, which will be
addressed in the next commit.
