Re: Alternate thought to 128 bits

From: Edward Glamkowski (EGlamkowski@MATHEMATICA-MPR.COM)
Date: 02/04/98


>Was sitting here thinking about this, looking through the 10 page or so
>walkthru on converting to 128 bits, and wondered this instead.  What would
>it take to just add in another set of flags?  i.e. RACE_ANTI_ELF,
>RACE_ANTI_DWARF, etc.  I know I'd have to put all that in structs.h, np
>there, add in another menu under Oasis, again, not a prob.  Add in funcs
>under utils.h for finding these, etc, but is there something else that I'm
>missing here?  If this wouldn't be too tough to do, then I'd rather just
>do that instead of going thru and doing the 128 bits.  Or would my
>thinking have a major downside to it that I'm not seeing?  (Other than
>limited by only 32 flags?)  TIA,

It may solve the ITEM_ANTI_xxx problem, but invariably some other
problem will crop up in the near future (maybe ITEM_RESIST_xxx and
ITEM_IMMUNE_xxx flags?).
Use bitfields! :)


     +------------------------------------------------------------+
     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
     +------------------------------------------------------------+



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST