Re: Time Constants , Was: Re: [HELP] Backstab crashing

From: Daniel A. Koepke (
Date: 01/27/01

On Sat, 27 Jan 2001, Peter Ajamian wrote:

> You can figure seasons by dividing the number of months into four equal
> chunks and offsetting by a constant which sould signify the start of one
> of the seasons, something like this...
> [...]

That's pretty much what I was thinking of.  I'm still not sure if I want
to introduce that many more #defines, though.  After all, we're talking
about more than a dozen new time-related definitions being added to

> Well, if you want really true flexibility you can set up a table for
> the months that defines the number of days in each month individually.

I perhaps wasn't clear, originally.  I'm hoping to implement the same as
the default CircleMUD setup without any additional overhead for bpl18, and
if people want the more precise control that a system like yours would
provide they can write it for themselves (and maybe release a patch for
it, if they're nice).  Depending upon the specific features of their
designed or targeted time system, an implementation provided by us would
probably be either too much or too little.  For instance, people might
want to implement leap years or several more seasons or who knows what
else.  I don't think we can justify the verbosity of this if the majority
are going to use the typical setup, nor do I think there's a concise
solution that would be flexible enough.  The worst result would be a
lengthy system that was too inflexible and required someone to go through
the hell of removing it.  In any case, since time_info is global, I think
they would be able to safely implement whatever system they wanted behind
the #defines without much ado.

In summary, with the possible exception of beginning_of_time, time in
bpl18 should work EXACTLY like time in bpl17.  The difference will be
rhetorical: the constants are placed in #defines for easy redefinition,
but the effect produced should be no different.  Moving to an entirely
different means of calculating the time constants via tables would be nice
for flexibility, but beyond the scope of a change for a beta release, I
think.  Maybe for post 3.1, unless someone else can justify it for bpl18.

And now for something completely different:

This time of year is great for sports fans.  So to get out a little
excitement: three cheers for Capriati.  That Agassi-Rafter match was good
stuff; I pick Agassi over Clement in 3.  In golf, what the hell was that
from Woods?!  Hit it into the water, take the drop for a penalty, and then
hit it right back into the water?!  Every Lakers game I've seen this
season (which is only 4), they've lost: Isiah WHO?!  What'd they sign him
for?  And, going out on a limb, here, I'll pick the Giants to upset the
Ravens in the Super Bowl.  I think the Giants could attack the DBs
downfield and the middle with a back or tight-end to keep the Raven's
linebackers honest; then try Barber around the edges to mix it up -- the
Raven's defensive line is too big to get out there fast enough to catch
him and if you're stretching the DBs vertically you'll maybe find an
opening for a few good gains.

-dak: What does not kill me... delays the inevitable...

   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/03/01 PST