Re: Reconsidering Special Procedure Semantics Change

From: Daniel A. Koepke (
Date: 03/12/02

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, George Greer wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Mar 2002, Daniel A. Koepke wrote:
> >I'm reconsidering changing special procedures to differentiate
> >between mob and violence pulse calls.  The problem is that much of
> >the existing spec-procs rely upon ch being the mobile when there is
> >no command.
> That could be considered a bug since you should assume 'me' is
> yourself, but not 'ch'.

Oh, yes, I consider it a bug as much as I consider the shared semantics of
violence and mobile pulse spec invocations a bug -- if not more of one.
Unfortunately, it's a design bug and considerable non-stock code has been
written that relies on the current, if flawed, design.  That's what I'm
concerned about.

> Not that it helps anything other than what you call that changes that
> have to be done.


That's it: no more Babelfish for you.


   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |
   | Newbie List:   |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 06/25/03 PDT