Re: [CODE][BUG] Exploitable bug in do_flee/do_simple_move

From: Mike Breuer (
Date: 09/12/01

I had a point-by-point response prepared, but I'm going to forgo it.  It
comes down to this: you are saying that overriding existing behavior is the
same thing as blocking behavior.  I disagree-- or at least I did before we
got into this.  In the case of my quest stone, I must allow the movement to
occur (by invoking the default handler-- not by writing my own code), and
then check the current location in order to adjust the item's properties.  I
feel that is reasonable to expect a spec_proc to do this, but apparently
this goes against assumptions made in the stock code.

If I'm the only one who wants to code it that way, then I guess the "bug" is
not relevant to everyone else as I had assumed.  I might even be persuaded
to change some of my procs around, since I'm bound to run into other
examples of stock code that makes the same assumptions.  In any case, I
should proabably avoid such debates when I'm wired from watching CNN for 16
hours.  Thanks for your views.


   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/06/01 PST