Re: Dotmode etc.

From: Shay (
Date: 05/17/02

At 04:17 PM 5/17/2002 Friday, you wrote:
>On Fri, 17 May 2002 13:45:40 -0500, shay <> wrote:
>>Not exactly.  In the first case, if the 2nd argument (the 1) isn't a
>>number, then assume that your grabbing the 1st one.  In the second case, if
>>the 1st argument is a number represented by a word, then the object is the
>>next argument, otherwise the object is the 1st argument.  Much like the
>>dotmode is currently, just tweaked a bit.
>Here is a potiential side effect that just occurred to me. If you use
>the "prettier" method of "get second sword" you introduce the possiblity
>of confusion with object that use number words as keywords.
>For Example:
>You have the following item.
>Description: "Nazgul's second book of Necromancy."
>Keywords: book, necromancy, nazguls, second
>How do you handle the command "read second"? (assumming the character
>may also possess the first, third and fourth books of necromancy, which
>is why they didn't just "read book".)

Depends.  In the case I suggested, you would only use 'two', not 'second'.
So instead of saying:
read second
you would say
read second two

course, that looks silly, and only works if you have 2 of those books.  If you only had one, then
read second
would work.  Again, it depends on how you want to change it, and how far you're willing to go.  I would think that going from '2.' to 'two' would be hard enough, without worrying about proper English.. ;)  Course, I'm just a devils advocate..

>>I'm not saying it would be easy.. but could be done.
>Of course it could be done. The same is true of all the questions that
>pop up on the list that follow the formula: "Is it possible to program X?"
>The short, smart ass answer is: Yes.  A more helpfull answer is: Yes,
>given you are willing to spend the required amount of time and effort,
>nearly anything can be programmed into the mud.

I thought that was what I meant by "I'm not saying it would be easy...".

>A better question to ask is: Is new feature X worth the time and effort
>it would take to program? The answer will vary depending on how much the
>new feature is wanted and the programmers skill. I think that given the
>original poster's question was basically "How can I remove dotmodes?" the
>variable parameter scheme you describe is probably beyond their coding
>skills. Will going from 2.sword to sword 2 really be worth the effort?

True it could be beyond their coding skills, but I felt it was an interesting topic and was inclined to expand upon it.  I really don't feel that I went to far beyond what they were looking for.  If they think so, then I am sorry for losing there train of thought.

>In any case if you, or anyone else, implement the new system, I recommend
>having it exist side by side with the dotmode method.  If you take it out
>completely, I garauntee it won't be long before you get some players asking
>"How come 'wear 2.pants' doesn't work anymore?"

I completely agree.  I'm thinking of doing the same in mine.. but I find many other things that need doing first.. as usual..  doncha just luv programmin? :)

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

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