On 4/21/98 11:27 AM, James Turner (turnerjh@XTN.NET) stated:
>But then you have to put the limit in every time you set the char's
>strength. If something says get, it is implied it gives a value.
>Since C can't give references, this obfuscates the role of GET_*.
>Allowing code to assign STR too high can result later in overruns in
>references to the lookup tables. Then, when that happens, it isn't
>trivial to find out what assignment made the STR too large. But
>having a setStrength function would take care of that in short order,
>eliminating the risk (though not the large assignment, which could
>produce a runtime warning, as opposed to a crash at some vague later
>point).
Now it sounds like your arguing in favor of C++ - weren't you NOT in
favor of it before? This is the perfect situation for C++, of course -
member functions. Plus it would clean up a lot of code.
- Chris Jacobson
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| 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