Re: Hiya folks...

From: Graham Gilmore (
Date: 08/22/95

On Tue, 22 Aug 1995, Daniel [Trice] Koepke wrote:

> > 	I haven't looked into this, but the reason I suggested it was so 
> > that you could set your mod to -25, and so have GET_COND(ch, FULL) -= 
> > 25.. regardless of your hunger at the time of wearing the item or 
> > whatever, it would be <= -1 with the APPLY_HUNGER..
> > 
> It is my understanding, although I've not looked at the code, having FULL 
> being 0 means you ARE hungry, while at 25 your full.  This makes more 

	24 is the maximum I believe, but yes, 0 == hungry, 24 == full.

> Also, following "simple" math rules:
> 	GET_COND(ch, FULL) -= mod;
> Would decrease FULL by the mod UNLESS mod was negative.
> 	GET_COND(ch, FULL) -= -25;
> This ADDs 25 to the condition because your taking away the negative value 
> (basically, it's like saying you don't have no money (hence you do) -- 
> it's a double negative).

	Exactly... I've caused more confusion here I think (oops :).  The 
code is actually GET_COND(ch, FULL) += mod, and I suggested a mod of 
-25.. which in my head, I switched around to GET_COND(ch, FULL) -= 25 to 
express the idea, not to give a snippet of code.  By setting the mod to 
-25, you would have GET_COND(ch, FULL) += -25, which , you will agree I 
hope (assuming you aren't using "new math" ;), achieves the same thing as 
GET_COND(ch, FULL) -= 25.

> If I'm correct:
> 	GET_COND(ch, FULL) <= -1;
> Is not a valid statement, if it is then I've either forgot about it or 

	Again, this isn't meant to be a code statement, it's a boolean 
expression.  It would go inside the brackets of an if statement... 

	if (GET_COND(ch, FULL) <= -1)
		never_hungry;    <- **WARNING** This is not a procedure in
					CircleMUD.. don't tell me it doesn't
					work ;)

as opposed to 

	if (GET_COND(ch, FULL) == -1)

> it's difficult to tell the difference anyway :)).  Unless you mean that 
> you would want to set FULL condition under -1, which would probably make 
> Circle vomit or treat it as if it were -1.  (or it could just be that 

	I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to say here, but I 
suspect that you've been experiencing this whenever you read my posts.  ;)

	PLEASE PLEASE reread this one until you get it... I think 
everyone else is tired of watching these ones <g>

	Graham Gilmore

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/18/00 PST