[Inform] smart commas
michael...@ey.com
Has anyone ever tried to implement "smart" commas into the list-writing
library routines? As it stands, Inform will automatically put a comma
between all but the last two articles, like so:
"You are carrying a dog, a cat, a fat squirrel and an angry parakeet."
"You see a spoon, a napkin and a big bucket of lard here."
This is fine for simple, one-level lists. However, this can get confusing
when listing the contents of containers. Here's an example:
"You are carrying a croquet mallet, a small velvet box, in which is a
diamond engagement ring and a sixteen-pound bag of cat litter."
Now, if you check the list carefully, and if you're familiar with the
syntax of Inform lists, you can figure out that the bag of cat litter is
not actually in the small velvet box; you must be carrying it in your
hands. However, the list is easily misread, and it's rather jarring to
have to go back and work out what exactly is inside what.
Here's another example:
"You are carrying a burlap sack, in which is a stick of dynamite, a
lunchbox, in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid pear
and a coil of rope and a neat-looking rock."
This of course makes perfect sense if you type INV TALL and get
You are carrying:
a burlap sack
a stick of dynamite
a lunchbox
a ham sandwich
several cookies
a rancid pear
a coil of rope
a neat-looking rock
-- but in WIDE format, which I prefer, it looks terrible. I realize that
inventory is constantly shuffling around as you pick up and drop objects,
and that the above case wouldn't happen very often, but it bugs me.
Ideally, what I'd like to do is get the program to print a comma after a
recursed list -- that is, items inside a container that is being listed
-- if that container is the next-to last item in the list. That way, you
would get lists like:
"You are carrying a croquet mallet, a small velvet box, in which is a
diamond engagement ring, and a sixteen-pound bag of cat litter."
Which reads MUCH better. The other example still sounds a bit weird:
"You are carrying a burlap sack, in which is a stick of dynamite, a
lunchbox, in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid pear,
and a coil of rope, and a neat-looking rock."
But maybe the lists-within-lists could be set off by semicolons or
hyphens, or even a hierarchy of separators, looking like this:
"You are carrying a burlap sack, in which is a stick of dynamite, a
lunchbox - in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid pear
- and a coil of rope; and a neat-looking rock.";
Has anyone ever tried this? Any suggestions?
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Andrew Plotkin
michael...@ey.com wrote:
> Ideally, what I'd like to do is get the program to print a comma after a
> recursed list -- that is, items inside a container that is being listed
> -- if that container is the next-to last item in the list. That way, you
> would get lists like:
> "You are carrying a croquet mallet, a small velvet box, in which is a
> diamond engagement ring, and a sixteen-pound bag of cat litter."
> Which reads MUCH better. The other example still sounds a bit weird:
> "You are carrying a burlap sack, in which is a stick of dynamite, a
> lunchbox, in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid pear,
> and a coil of rope, and a neat-looking rock."
Yeah, it really gets pretty confusing no matter what you do.
> But maybe the lists-within-lists could be set off by semicolons or
> hyphens, or even a hierarchy of separators, looking like this:
I prefer to use TERSE_BIT (already available in the library :-) which
uses parentheses as recursive separators.
"You are carrying a burlap sack (in which is..." [etc]
By setting inventory_style to include TERSE_BIT at the beginning of the
game, and Replacing InvWideSub ditto, you can get all (wide) inventory
listings to use parentheses. I find this to be pretty much mandatory in
any game which uses complicated containers.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."
Rhodri James
In article <886192896...@dejanews.com>,
<michael...@ey.com> wrote:
> This is fine for simple, one-level lists. However, this can get confusing
> when listing the contents of containers. Here's an example:
Unfortunately, *English* is confusing at this level. I'm not convinced
that you can be grammatically correct and unambiguous in your extended
example without splitting the report into separate sentences.
"You are carrying a burlap sack and a neat-looking rock. In the burlap
sack is a stick of dynamite, a lunchbox and a coil of rope. In the
lunchbox is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a racid pear."
Now code that :-)
--
Rhodri James *-* Wildebeeste herder to the masses
If you don't know who I work for, you can't misattribute my words to them
... Intel Outside
Patrick Kellum
In article <48126600...@wildebst.demon.co.uk>, Rhodri James was talking about:
>"You are carrying a burlap sack and a neat-looking rock. In the burlap
>sack is a stick of dynamite, a lunchbox and a coil of rope. In the
>lunchbox is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a racid pear."
>
>Now code that :-)
Isn't there just such an example in the Designers Manual? If not, it
shouldn't be too hard to implement.
Patrick
---
A Title For This Page -- http://www.syix.com/patrick/
Bow Wow Wow Fan Page -- http://www.syix.com/patrick/bowwowwow/
The Small Wonder Page -- http://smallwonder.simplenet.com/
My Arcade Page -- http://ygw.bohemianweb.com/arcade/
"I have photographs of you naked with a squirrel." - Dave Barry
David Glasser
Rhodri James <rho...@wildebst.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <886192896...@dejanews.com>,
> <michael...@ey.com> wrote:
> > This is fine for simple, one-level lists. However, this can get confusing
> > when listing the contents of containers. Here's an example:
>
> Unfortunately, *English* is confusing at this level. I'm not convinced
> that you can be grammatically correct and unambiguous in your extended
> example without splitting the report into separate sentences.
>
> "You are carrying a burlap sack and a neat-looking rock. In the burlap
> sack is a stick of dynamite, a lunchbox and a coil of rope. In the
> lunchbox is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a racid pear."
>
> Now code that :-)
I think there is something called TADS that will do that for you :-)
--David Glasser
gla...@NOSPAMuscom.com
Mikko P Vuorinen
In <1d3vtnb.gh...@usol-phl-pa-042.uscom.com> gla...@NOSPAMuscom.com (David Glasser) writes:
>Rhodri James <rho...@wildebst.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> "You are carrying a burlap sack and a neat-looking rock. In the burlap
>> sack is a stick of dynamite, a lunchbox and a coil of rope. In the
>> lunchbox is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a racid pear."
>>
>> Now code that :-)
>I think there is something called TADS that will do that for you :-)
Alan does that too.
--
)))) (((( + Mikko Vuorinen + mvuo...@cc.helsinki.fi
)) OO `oo'((( + Dilbon@IRC + http://www.helsinki.fi/~mvuorine/
6 (_) ( ((( + GSM 050-5859733 +
`____c 8__/((( + + Eat meat.
Rhodri James
In article <6b6jgv$ru1$1...@neko.syix.com>,
Patrick Kellum <pat...@syix.com> mused thus upon the cosmic all:
> Isn't there just such an example in the Designers Manual? If not, it
> shouldn't be too hard to implement.
I thought so, but couldn't be bothered to go looking at that hour of the
morning. It's not quite as trivial as it might appear at first glance,
but it's still pretty straightforward really.
--
Rhodri James *-* Wildebeeste herder to the masses
If you don't know who I work for, you can't misattribute my words to them
... My heart is Danish, likewise is it blue
Patrick Kellum
In article <4812dc1f...@wildebst.demon.co.uk>, Rhodri James was talking about:
>I thought so, but couldn't be bothered to go looking at that hour of the
>morning. It's not quite as trivial as it might appear at first glance,
>but it's still pretty straightforward really.
Really? Just do a non-recursive listing of the inventory. Then do
another non-recurisive listing of each container in the first listing.
This is what was being described, correct?
Petter Sjölund
Where have I seen brackets being used instead?
"You are carrying a burlap sack (in which is a stick of dynamite), a
lunchbox (in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid
pear), a coil of rope and a neat-looking rock."
or even
"You are carrying a burlap sack (in which is a stick of dynamite and a
lunchbox (in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid
pear)), a coil of rope and a neat-looking rock."
Now, could please somebody code this so that I don't have to do it
myself! :-9
Petter Sjölund
----------------------------------------------------
Stockholmsvägen 53
S-182 74 Stocksund
Sweden
Phone +46 (8) 85 43 34
Beeper +46 740 455 606
----------------------------------------------------
Andrew Plotkin
> "You are carrying a burlap sack (in which is a stick of dynamite), a
> lunchbox (in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid
> pear), a coil of rope and a neat-looking rock."
> or even
> "You are carrying a burlap sack (in which is a stick of dynamite and a
> lunchbox (in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid
> pear)), a coil of rope and a neat-looking rock."
> Now, could please somebody code this so that I don't have to do it
> myself! :-9
See my first post on this subject. About TERSE_BIT.
GLYPH
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998 michael...@ey.com wrote:
> Has anyone ever tried to implement "smart" commas into the list-writing
> library routines? As it stands, Inform will automatically put a comma
> between all but the last two articles, like so:
...
I didn't really like using the parentheses in look or search statements,
so I've hacked the library files to add my own listing type. My new
libraries are transparent to older programs. You simply set a certain
global variable to TRUE and the library switches to my list format.
> Here's another example:
>
> "You are carrying a burlap sack, in which is a stick of dynamite, a
> lunchbox, in which is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid pear
> and a coil of rope and a neat-looking rock."
My hack lists the first level of the tree, then recurses into the next
level, and so on, like this:
"You are carrying a burlap sack and a neat looking rock. In the burlap
sack is a stick of dynamite, a lunchbox and a coil of rope. In the
lunchbox is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid pear."
This gives the player a sense of how far he has to dig to get to his
stuff. When used for the Look and the Search commands, the list only
recurses once to go along with the normal method of listing.
> Has anyone ever tried this? Any suggestions?
>
Well, I could let you know once my library hack is finished. (It doesn't
handle group-together objects yet)
I'll put it on Aminet with my smart "and" parser. (see the thread
TO:graham_Re:parser or whatever)
- GLYPH
E-Mail <y8...@unb.ca>
or <graham...@hotmail.com>
------------------
Shameless plug for my web page:
<http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/9315>
Rhodri James
In article <6b92ss$dt8$1...@neko.syix.com>,
Patrick Kellum <pat...@syix.com> wrote:
> In article <4812dc1f...@wildebst.demon.co.uk>, Rhodri James was
> talking about:
> >I thought so, but couldn't be bothered to go looking at that hour of
> >the morning. It's not quite as trivial as it might appear at first
> >glance, but it's still pretty straightforward really.
> Really? Just do a non-recursive listing of the inventory. Then do
> another non-recurisive listing of each container in the first listing.
Yes. You have to do the two passes separately, which the naive (or
terminally tired :-) might not notice immediately.
--
Rhodri James *-* Wildebeeste herder to the masses
If you don't know who I work for, you can't misattribute my words to them
... "I can't believe it's not Rutter!"
GLYPH
On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Rhodri James wrote:
> In article <886192896...@dejanews.com>,
> <michael...@ey.com> wrote:
> > This is fine for simple, one-level lists. However, this can get confusing
> > when listing the contents of containers. Here's an example:
>
> Unfortunately, *English* is confusing at this level. I'm not convinced
> that you can be grammatically correct and unambiguous in your extended
> example without splitting the report into separate sentences.
>
> "You are carrying a burlap sack and a neat-looking rock. In the burlap
> sack is a stick of dynamite, a lunchbox and a coil of rope. In the
> lunchbox is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a racid pear."
>
> Now code that :-)
I just did. Want it?
Jean Jordaan
GLYPH writes:
> "You are carrying a burlap sack and a neat looking rock. In the burlap
> sack is a stick of dynamite, a lunchbox and a coil of rope. In the
> lunchbox is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid pear."
something about inventories that's
always bugged me, is that the contents
of things usually get listed when they
are "opened". if i'm carrying a wallet
in a bag, at some point i end up doing
an inventory to check what's in the
wallet, and see only " (which is closed)"
or something behind it. then i have to
explicitly open it and get another
inventory.
i don't see that this can easily be
solved consistently, since some things
are not that obvious to be opened as
a wallet (such as anything with a
secret compartment in it). perhaps
an intermediate solution would allow
you to "look in" anything, whether
it's opened or shut, carried or
present, to get an inventory
of the contents of that specific
object.
jean jordaan
GLYPH
On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, GLYPH wrote:
> My hack lists the first level of the tree, then recurses into the next
> level, and so on, like this:
>
> "You are carrying a burlap sack and a neat looking rock. In the burlap
> sack is a stick of dynamite, a lunchbox and a coil of rope. In the
> lunchbox is a ham sandwich, several cookies and a rancid pear."
>
> This gives the player a sense of how far he has to dig to get to his
> stuff. When used for the Look and the Search commands, the list only
> recurses once to go along with the normal method of listing.
>
> > Has anyone ever tried this? Any suggestions?
> >
>
> Well, I could let you know once my library hack is finished. (It doesn't
> handle group-together objects yet)
I've cleaned up my hack to use WriteListFrom a little, so it now handles
everything. I'll post it on Aminet fairly soon.
However, there is still one bit of hacking I want to do. I hate looking
at parentheses in prose. Parentheses are usually used when the writer has
forgotten to mention something earlier and doesn't have an eraser handy.
Instead of this:
"You can see a book (which is open) and a lamp (which is lit)."
my hack will say this:
"You can see an open book and a lit lamp."
By the way, if anyone thinks hacking the library is too unethical, I could
write my routines in an Include file with a bunch of Replace statements,
though the include file would be nearly the size of parserm.h.
Jeff Hatch
GLYPH wrote:
[snip]
> However, there is still one bit of hacking I want to do. I hate looking
> at parentheses in prose. Parentheses are usually used when the writer has
> forgotten to mention something earlier and doesn't have an eraser handy.
>
> Instead of this:
>
> "You can see a book (which is open) and a lamp (which is lit)."
>
> my hack will say this:
>
> "You can see an open book and a lit lamp."
I like your hack. But it might cause players to expect that "take open
book" would work, which would be rather hard to implement.
-Rúmil
GLYPH
Hey, good point. I've finished implementing my idea, now I'll see if I
can implement your idea, too. Here's a few adjectives I might try to
implement for your idea:
open / opened
closed
lit / lighted
unlit / unlighted
empty
non-empty / unempty?
How shall I describe things which are switched on or off?
"an on microwave" is wrong. Isn't english a bugger?
"a switched-on microwave" is awkward, and so is "a turned-on microwave"
Right now my hack would say "a lit microwave". Any thoughts?
Mary K. Kuhner
In article <Pine.SOL.3.96.980213...@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca>,
GLYPH <y8...@unb.ca> wrote:
>How shall I describe things which are switched on or off?
>"an on microwave" is wrong. Isn't english a bugger?
>"a switched-on microwave" is awkward, and so is "a turned-on microwave"
>Right now my hack would say "a lit microwave". Any thoughts?
A running microwave? An active microwave? An operating
microwave? Hm, and then I turn it off. A non-running
microwave doesn't sound good. An inactive one--that's not
so bad. A non-operational one sounds broken, not just turned
off. I think "active" is the best of these, though it's not
perfect....
Mary Kuhner mkku...@genetics.washington.edu
Brock Kevin Nambo
Mary K. Kuhner wrote in message <6c2iqd$eo2$1...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>...
>In article <Pine.SOL.3.96.980213...@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca>,
>GLYPH <y8...@unb.ca> wrote:
>
>>How shall I describe things which are switched on or off?
>>"an on microwave" is wrong. Isn't english a bugger?
>>"a switched-on microwave" is awkward, and so is "a turned-on microwave"
I agree, a turned-on microwave would be VERY awkward <EG>
>>Right now my hack would say "a lit microwave". Any thoughts?
>
>A running microwave? An active microwave? An operating
>microwave? Hm, and then I turn it off. A non-running
>microwave doesn't sound good. An inactive one--that's not
>so bad. A non-operational one sounds broken, not just turned
>off. I think "active" is the best of these, though it's not
>perfect....
What DO you call a working microwave anyway?
Best I could come up with is "microwave in use" for on and just "microwave"
for off.
:(
>>BKNambo
--
http://come.to/brocks.place
Somebody loves you. (Not necessarily me.)
Alan Conroy
>What DO you call a working microwave anyway?
>
>Best I could come up with is "microwave in use" for on and just "microwave"
>for off.
Operating microwave
Activated microwave
Working microwave
- Alan Conroy
I wanna be a firetruck when I grow up...
Kenneth Fair
In article <6c2iqd$eo2$1...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>,
mkku...@evolution.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner) wrote:
>In article <Pine.SOL.3.96.980213...@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca>,
>GLYPH <y8...@unb.ca> wrote:
>
>>How shall I describe things which are switched on or off?
>>"an on microwave" is wrong. Isn't english a bugger?
>>"a switched-on microwave" is awkward, and so is "a turned-on microwave"
>>Right now my hack would say "a lit microwave". Any thoughts?
>
>A running microwave? An active microwave? An operating
>microwave? Hm, and then I turn it off. A non-running
>microwave doesn't sound good. An inactive one--that's not
>so bad. A non-operational one sounds broken, not just turned
>off. I think "active" is the best of these, though it's not
>perfect....
Instead of "non-operational," you'd want to use "non-operating."
You could also use "functioning" and "non-functioning."
I think BKN's suggestion is best. Call it a "operating" or "active"
or whatever microwave when on, and just a microwave when off.
But how can you differentiate between an object like a microwave or TV
and a switch? It doesn't make much sense to say an "operating switch."
You may have to leave the parentheticals for switchable objects.
--
KEN FAIR - U. Chicago Law | <http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/kjfair>
Of Counsel, U. of Ediacara | Power Mac! | CABAL(tm) | I'm w/in McQ - R U?
"Any smoothly functioning technology will be
indistinguishable from a rigged demo." Isaac Asimov
Steve McKinney
Alan Conroy had this to say:
>>What DO you call a working microwave anyway?
>>
>>Best I could come up with is "microwave in use" for on and just "microwave"
>>for off.
>
>
>Operating microwave
>Activated microwave
>Working microwave
Shaking microwave
Sparking microwave
Smoking microwave
Burning microwave
*sniff*
I think I smell something...
--
Steve McKinney <sj...@bellsouth.net>
"Never let your sense of morals keep you from doing what is right."
--Isaac Asimov
Brock Kevin Nambo
Kenneth Fair wrote in message ...
>Instead of "non-operational," you'd want to use "non-operating."
>You could also use "functioning" and "non-functioning."
>
>I think BKN's suggestion is best. Call it a "operating" or "active"
>or whatever microwave when on, and just a microwave when off.
Ah, thanks.. ;D
>But how can you differentiate between an object like a microwave or TV
>and a switch? It doesn't make much sense to say an "operating switch."
>
>You may have to leave the parentheticals for switchable objects.
"A switch set to ON" might work; although that's almost as bad as "a switch
(which is on)" it might be flexible enough to handle "a switch set to
MEDIUM"
"A flicked-on switch?" Naaah...
>>BKNambo (who is currently off)
TenthStone
kjf...@midway.uchicago.edu.REMOVEME (Kenneth Fair) caused this to appear in our collective minds on Sun, 15 Feb 1998 17:13:27 GMT:
>In article <6c2iqd$eo2$1...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>,
>mkku...@evolution.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner) wrote:
>
>>In article <Pine.SOL.3.96.980213...@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca>,
>>GLYPH <y8...@unb.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>How shall I describe things which are switched on or off?
>>>"an on microwave" is wrong. Isn't english a bugger?
>>>"a switched-on microwave" is awkward, and so is "a turned-on microwave"
>>>Right now my hack would say "a lit microwave". Any thoughts?
>>
>>A running microwave? An active microwave? An operating
>>microwave? Hm, and then I turn it off. A non-running
>>microwave doesn't sound good. An inactive one--that's not
>>so bad. A non-operational one sounds broken, not just turned
>>off. I think "active" is the best of these, though it's not
>>perfect....
>
>Instead of "non-operational," you'd want to use "non-operating."
>You could also use "functioning" and "non-functioning."
>
>I think BKN's suggestion is best. Call it a "operating" or "active"
>or whatever microwave when on, and just a microwave when off.
>
>But how can you differentiate between an object like a microwave or TV
>and a switch? It doesn't make much sense to say an "operating switch."
>
>You may have to leave the parentheticals for switchable objects.
You could, I suppose, just bear with it and use an adjective phrase ("which is on").
It seems to me that this entire argument would be unccessary if Orwell's vision
in _1984_ had come true. You could define a switchable word, and then just
add "un" before it. "un-true" "un-refined" "un-active"
Then again, "un-on"? What if someone made a mistake and used a negative
adjective ("un-unamerican")? Perhaps we could teach a compiler true
English, even randomize words slightly. You could type
"%Richard% %to see, past% %book%. %Richard% %to get, past% %book%."
and the program would return
"Richard noticed the book and picked it up."
Eventually, IF programmers would become a seperate culture altogether, as their
ever-coding minds would begin to speak in code, as in
"Near object to be present to market present participle report of current year"
This is all a subtle hint to the effect that sometimes, while attempting to eliminate
small imperfections, we make things greatly flawed.
-- TenthStone
tenth...@hotmail.com mcc...@erols.com a987...@titan.vcu.edu
Benjamin Kenward
: Kenneth Fair wrote in message ...
: >But how can you differentiate between an object like a microwave or TV
: >and a switch? It doesn't make much sense to say an "operating switch."
: >
: >You may have to leave the parentheticals for switchable objects.
um... why not just insist that switchable objects also have a property
containing a string to be used in the parenthesese when on (and one for off)?
you could do this for the other attributes as well, making it nice and
customisable.
ben
--
--------------------------------------------
FREE THE GANDALF 3! 3 YEARS FOR "CONSPIRACY TO INCITE
PERSONS UNKNOWN TO COMMIT ARSON" IS OUTRAGEOUS.
(All they did was write a newspaper and prepare press releases)
Don't be scared off by the thought police. Make all your e-mails
illegal by putting in reports of your favourite actions...
* Oct 31- Opencast quarry in Derbyshire trashed in raid- sorted!
* Nov 1- Street Party in Oxford, highway obstructed and illegal rave- fair
play!
* Nov 23- Action at Hillgrove Farm, Witney, kittens for vivisection
breeders,
fence trashed- nice one!
>@>Disobey! Their power comes from our obedience<@<
Andrew Plotkin
Benjamin Kenward (some...@sable.ox.ac.uk) wrote:
> : Kenneth Fair wrote in message ...
> : >But how can you differentiate between an object like a microwave or TV
> : >and a switch? It doesn't make much sense to say an "operating switch."
> : >
> : >You may have to leave the parentheticals for switchable objects.
> um... why not just insist that switchable objects also have a property
> containing a string to be used in the parenthesese when on (and one for off)?
> you could do this for the other attributes as well, making it nice and
> customisable.
At that point, you just tell the user to use the invent property. That
allows him to customize anything, stick on any string, use or skip
parentheses, whatever.
Kenneth Fair
In article <6c93mc$gut$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>, some...@sable.ox.ac.uk (Benjamin
Kenward) wrote:
>: Kenneth Fair wrote in message ...
>: >But how can you differentiate between an object like a microwave or TV
>: >and a switch? It doesn't make much sense to say an "operating switch."
>: >
>: >You may have to leave the parentheticals for switchable objects.
>
>um... why not just insist that switchable objects also have a property
>containing a string to be used in the parenthesese when on (and one for off)?
>you could do this for the other attributes as well, making it nice and
>customisable.
Hmm, like a when_on_inv property, or something like that. I like that
suggestion, and you could have the library look for this property and
use it only if it is there. That way, you can still compile old code
with the new library.
GLYPH
On 16 Feb 1998, Benjamin Kenward wrote:
> : Kenneth Fair wrote in message ...
> : >But how can you differentiate between an object like a microwave or TV
> : >and a switch? It doesn't make much sense to say an "operating switch."
> : >
> : >You may have to leave the parentheticals for switchable objects.
>
> um... why not just insist that switchable objects also have a property
> containing a string to be used in the parenthesese when on (and one for off)?
> you could do this for the other attributes as well, making it nice and
> customisable.
>
> ben
Well, I got rid of the parentheses. I'll use "active microwave" and
"microwave", which does produce "active lightswitch" and "lightswitch",
but that's not incorrect. I want the hacks to stay completely compatible
with the regular library, so I don't want to force any attributes onto
people.
I -could- make the hack support a user function which prints out the
adjectives for an object, with access to the default adjective printing
routines so the author doesn't have to rewrite all the code. This would
work similar to the INVENT property in the regular library. I think that
would be cool.
FemaleDeer
>From: al...@accessone.com (Alan Conroy)
>Date: Sat, Feb 14, 1998 23:13 EST
>>What DO you call a working microwave anyway?
>Operating microwave
>Activated microwave
>Working microwave
A nuking microwave.
FD :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Femal...@aol.com "Good breeding consists in
concealing how much we think of ourselves and how
little we think of the other person." Mark Twain
GLYPH
On 5 Mar 1998, FemaleDeer wrote:
> >From: al...@accessone.com (Alan Conroy)
> >Date: Sat, Feb 14, 1998 23:13 EST
>
> >>What DO you call a working microwave anyway?
>
> >Operating microwave
> >Activated microwave
> >Working microwave
>
> A nuking microwave.
>
> FD :-)
With the newest version of my hack, you can indeed make the library say
"You can see a nuking microwave". Or, if you like, "You can see a
microwave which is nuking a pack of jiffy-pop", or whatever.
The newest, bug free (I think) version is at
<www.geocities.com/CollegePark/9315/infoglf2.zip>
as of March 6.