[Inform] 6/8 and pronouns - hack
Gunther Schmidl
>GET KNIFE. CUT ROPE WITH IT.
'it' is set to 'rope' when it should be 'knife' still? This messes up
'AGAIN', too.
Here's an easy fix. In parserm.h, look for the lines saying
if (parameters > 0 && results-->2 >= 2)
PronounNotice(results-->2);
and add the line
if (pronoun_obj) == NULL
before PronounNotice(results-->2);
Thanks to zarf for the vital tip; I take no guarantees, though.
BTW, I proposed this to Graham as an optional feature (maybe define a
constant like PERSISTENT_PRONOUNS, like you have to do with
MANUAL_PRONOUNS), but here's the hack anyway :-)
--
+------------------------+----------------------------------------------+
+ Gunther Schmidl + "I couldn't help it. I can resist everything +
+ Ferd.-Markl-Str. 39/16 + except temptation" -- Oscar Wilde +
+ A-4040 LINZ +---------------+------------------------------+
+ Tel: 0732 25 28 57 + ICQ: 22447430 + http://gschmidl.home.ml.org/ +
+------------------------+---+-----------+------------------------------+
+ sothoth (at) usa (dot) net + please remove the "xxx." before replying +
+----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
David Glasser
> Are you, too annoyed that after
>
> >GET KNIFE. CUT ROPE WITH IT.
>
> 'it' is set to 'rope' when it should be 'knife' still? This messes up
> 'AGAIN', too.
Ick, I don't like it. The dobj becomes the pron, I say.
> Here's an easy fix. In parserm.h, look for the lines saying
>
> if (parameters > 0 && results-->2 >= 2)
> PronounNotice(results-->2);
>
> and add the line
>
> if (pronoun_obj) == NULL
>
> before PronounNotice(results-->2);
>
> Thanks to zarf for the vital tip; I take no guarantees, though.
>
> BTW, I proposed this to Graham as an optional feature (maybe define a
> constant like PERSISTENT_PRONOUNS, like you have to do with
> MANUAL_PRONOUNS), but here's the hack anyway :-)
At least make it user-controllable. (Insert plug for my ManPron module
that allows MANUAL_PRONOUNS to be user-controllable.)
--
David Glasser gla...@NOSPAMuscom.com http://onramp.uscom.com/~glasser
DGlasser @ ifMUD : fovea.retina.net:4001 | r.a.i-f FAQ: come.to/raiffaq
Sadie Hawkins, official band of David Glasser: http://www.port4000.com/
okbl...@usa.net
gla...@DELETEuscom.com (David Glasser) wrote:
>
> Ick, I don't like it. The dobj becomes the pron, I say.
>
How about the dobj becomes the pronoun unless that doesn't make sense. Then
the parser goes back through a certain number of previous "it"s to find out
which noun *does* make sense.
OK, it's a pipe dream.<g>
[ok]
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Joe Mason
>In article <1dk1cp2.3ol...@usol-209-186-16-187.uscom.com>,
> gla...@DELETEuscom.com (David Glasser) wrote:
>>
>> Ick, I don't like it. The dobj becomes the pron, I say.
>>
>
>How about the dobj becomes the pronoun unless that doesn't make sense. Then
>the parser goes back through a certain number of previous "it"s to find out
>which noun *does* make sense.
>
>OK, it's a pipe dream.<g>
<cough> Inscribe </cough>
Joe
--
Congratulations, Canada, on preserving your national igloo.
-- Mike Huckabee, Governor of Arkansas
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> In article <1dk1cp2.3ol...@usol-209-186-16-187.uscom.com>,
> gla...@DELETEuscom.com (David Glasser) wrote:
> >
> > Ick, I don't like it. The dobj becomes the pron, I say.
> >
>
> How about the dobj becomes the pronoun unless that doesn't make sense. Then
> the parser goes back through a certain number of previous "it"s to find out
> which noun *does* make sense.
>
> OK, it's a pipe dream.<g>
I think it should depend on the verb. For some verbs the
second object should become the pronoun.
Also,
> Give Bob the flowers
should set him_obj to Bob and it_obj to flowers, IMO.
Then there's the following:
---
> Look beneath the desk
Bending over to look under the desk, you notice a
mismatched patch in the carpet. Upon closer inspection,
you realise that there's a trap door here!
---
My instinct is that it_obj should now be the trap door.
(This goes for any object discovered by an action.)
That's not something the library can do automatically,
but I think it would be a nice gesture on the author's
part to set the appropriate pronoun object in the
before rule (or wherever the text comes from that
mentions the object).
- jonadab
Mary K. Kuhner
>> Look beneath the desk
>Bending over to look under the desk, you notice a
>mismatched patch in the carpet. Upon closer inspection,
>you realise that there's a trap door here!
>My instinct is that it_obj should now be the trap door.
If the player typed:
>look beneath desk then open it
they will be sadly surprised by the outcome, especially if
opening the trap door was something they definitely didn't want
to do. I think as a player I'll stop using "it" altogether
if I encounter many surprises like this.
One favorite of mine, from Jigsaw: Graham neglected to straighten
out all the pronoun issues around a certain NPC, and when I
typed
>kiss her
I got the response
>You don't see any snow leopard here
Mary Kuhner mkku...@genetics.washington.edu
Dan Shiovitz
Mary K. Kuhner <mkku...@kingman.genetics.washington.edu> wrote:
>Jonadab the Unsightly One <jon...@zerospam.com> wrote:
>
>>> Look beneath the desk
>
>>Bending over to look under the desk, you notice a
>>mismatched patch in the carpet. Upon closer inspection,
>>you realise that there's a trap door here!
>
>>My instinct is that it_obj should now be the trap door.
>
>If the player typed:
>
>>look beneath desk then open it
>
>they will be sadly surprised by the outcome, especially if
The obvious patch for this is to make "look beneath desk then open it"
work differently than "look beneath desk<return>open it". Would this
be bad? Personally, I think I'd be ok with it, although someone's
going to end up being surprised any way you do it (eg, what if they
knew from previous experience that looking under the desk would reveal
the trapdoor and set the itobj? But this seems rather less
likely). Already, I believe, the undo command makes a distinction
between the two, so I suppose that's a precedent.
>Mary Kuhner mkku...@genetics.washington.edu
--
Dan Shiovitz || d...@cs.wisc.edu || http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~dbs
"...Incensed by some crack he had made about modern enlightened
thought, modern enlightened thought being practically a personal buddy
of hers, Florence gave him the swift heave-ho and--much against my
will, but she seemed to wish it--became betrothed to me." - PGW, J.a.t.F.S.
okbl...@usa.net
jcm...@uwaterloo.ca (Joe Mason) wrote:
>
> <cough> Inscribe </cough>
>
Do you have TB, or would you like to make a pitch here? ;-)
TenthStone
>In article <1dk1cp2.3ol...@usol-209-186-16-187.uscom.com>,
> gla...@DELETEuscom.com (David Glasser) wrote:
>>
>> Ick, I don't like it. The dobj becomes the pron, I say.
>>
>
>How about the dobj becomes the pronoun unless that doesn't make sense. Then
>the parser goes back through a certain number of previous "it"s to find out
>which noun *does* make sense.
I don't know the feasibility of this, but the most logical thing to do
would be to have "it" always point to a noun from a previous sentence,
and have a special "itself" pronoun point to a noun from the current
sentence.
-----------
The imperturbable TenthStone
tenth...@hotmail.com mcc...@erols.com mcc...@gsgis.k12.va.us
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> >>mismatched patch in the carpet. Upon closer inspection,
> >>you realise that there's a trap door here!
> >
> >>My instinct is that it_obj should now be the trap door.
d...@cs.wisc.edu (Dan Shiovitz) wrote:
> >If the player typed:
> >
> >>look beneath desk then open it
Hmmm... I didn't think of that. It's something
to think about, but I still think I'd like to have
"it" refer to the last object mentioned by either
the player or the game, not just the player.
(This of course cannot be done adequately by the
library, so the game will have to do it manually.
More work for authors. Yay.)
> The obvious patch for this is to make "look beneath desk then open it"
> work differently than "look beneath desk<return>open it". Would this
> be bad?
IMO no. "it" should mean exactly the value of it_obj when
the "it" is typed. Implementing that could be a little
trickier, but probably worth it.
> Already, I believe, the undo command makes a distinction
> between the two, so I suppose that's a precedent.
Quite so.
- jonadab
okbl...@usa.net
mcc...@erols.com (TenthStone) wrote:
>
> I don't know the feasibility of this, but the most logical thing to do
> would be to have "it" always point to a noun from a previous sentence,
> and have a special "itself" pronoun point to a noun from the current
> sentence.
>
Itself is fine:
> TIE THE ROPE TO ITSELF
But "it" could be a lot more sensible:
> FILL THE BALLOON WITH WATER
The balloon swells and trembles.
> TIE IT
Tie the water? Excuse me?
> NO, TIE THE BALLOON, YOU MORON
Okay. You tie the balloon so that the water will not leak out.
> OPEN THE WINDOW
You open the window. Your ex-friend Babs is down there kissing your
ex-boyfriend Maurice.
> DROP IT.
You're not carrying the window.
[etc.]