Re: Gnex 0.5.0

[Darren Vincent Hart <dvhart byu edu>]

Callum et al.,

Lots of updates to G'Nex!

Download version 0.6.1
http://www.dvhart.com/projects/gnex/

Or use CVS, module "gnex", directions here
http://www.dvhart.com/projects.php

Updates:

- better edge selection
- player LED indicators to indicate color and turn (very pretty :-)
- HIG compliance (complete?)
- better preferences dialog
- fixed crash on second time about is selected (ugly hack?)
- fixed installation issues (works using --prefix=/usr anyway)

Still Todo:

- C89 Compliance
- Better AI (I have pawned it off on some friends... maybe they will get
  to it before I do)
- Someone please review on_about1_activate() in callbacks.c.  I haven't 
  found a good way to show/hide the about box.  The problem is that it
  doesn't hide when OK is pressed, it destroys itself and I haven't
  found a better way to create it than what's implemented in
  on_about1_activate().  Comments welcome.

Future Todo:

- gnome sound support
- animated edge and square claiming
- animated game endings, ala iagno


Thoughts and comments appreciated.

Thanks,

Darren

On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 05:53, Callum McKenzie wrote:
> > I have implemented the dynamic window resizing with gconf support in
> > G'Nex.  Please have a look and let me know if this is more like what you
> > had in mind.  Note that the only AI setting currently implemented is
> > "Braindead" and the others will default to that.  If you are happy with
> > the preferences, resizing, etc. the other AI settings will be relatively
> > simple to add.
> 
> I've had a quick look. Generally speaking it looks good. Here's a list of 
> bugs though (sorry) :
> 
>  - Set the board to Huge, make the window as small as possible, observe the 
>    integer underflow.
>  - The code is not C89 compliant (i.e. it won't compile with gcc 2.9x), this
>    is because for anything less than C99 variables must be declared at the
>    beginning of a block. Add -std=gnu89 to CFLAGS to see this.
>  - The icon doesn't seem to be getting installed properly.
> 
> Thats it for real bugs, now some usability observations:
> 
>  - The preferences dialog is too crowded. Give things a bit more space.
>  - Placing of edges doesn't feel right. Two examples: you have to be
>    very close to where an edge is meant to be for it to be placed. Also,
>    if you are at the outside of the grid then being outside the grid (or
>    even over where the line is meant to go) results in no line being
>    hilighted. My recommendation would be to just hilight the nearest line
>    to the cursor, regardless of how far away it is. The player isn't going
>    to want to do anything but place lines, you might as well alwasy give
>    them something.
>  - The word "count" in the preferences is not good, just "number" (as in 
>    "number of players" since we're under the players heading) is probably
>    enough. Also the "Player n" selection should be an option menu, not
>    a combo box. (It would be nice to be able to enter the players name, but
>    a combo box still isn't the right thing.) Having said all that I'm not
>    sure that any of the gnome-games does this right, so I can't provide
>    you with a good example :).
>  - I still don't get a good feel for which players turn it is. I know that
>    all the hints are there, but since I'm looking at the grid and not the 
>    status bar I'm not really seeing it. If the suggestion about making
>    sure that the highlighted edge is always there is implemented this might
>    solve things by making a big coloured thing instantly appear in my vision.
>  - It definitely needs a better AI :).
> 
> I know thats a lot of criticism, but I'm trying to be constructive.
> 
> The AI is the big impedament to inclusion in gnome-games. The other problems
> are all simple to solve. The one thing I must warn you about inclusion in
> gnome-games is that eventually your code will be abused horribly by other
> people who just want to fix things, or are horribly offended that it takes
> 100ms too long to load or just feel like dragging your code into a dark 
> alleyway and beating it senseless because your easy-to-write O(n) algorithm
> could be replaced with an O(1) algorithm. It won't happen over-night, but
> being a collaborative project means that lots of people get in and stir 
> things.
> 
>  - Callum
>