Extra compiler check required (v0.17)

Messages are moved here (should anyone ever want to see them again) once they are no longer applicable to the current version (e.g. suggestions that have been implemented or bugs that have been fixed).

Moderator: George Gilbert

Forum rules
Please read the Forum rules and policies before posting. You may Image to help finance the hosting costs of this forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13769
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Extra compiler check required (v0.17)

Post by Gambit37 »

Having upgraded my Kid dungeon to the v0.17 format, I kept getting crashes with a coin slot/alcove puzzle:

I place a coin in the slot which then disappears and reveals an alcove containing items. I can pick up the items and use them normally. If I place them back on the alcove, the game instantly freezes - a complete lock up. I have to reboot the machine to get out of this and no error log file is generated. This always worked fine in previous versions

The only difference between my puzzles and the first 'small details' puzzle in the DM dungeon is that the objects on my alcove are LOWER numbered items than the alcove itself. In the DM dungeon, the falchion has a HIGHER object number than the alcove.

So I renumbered everything to match the DM dungeon, and the problem went away - no crashes.

I suggest that if it's *essential* that objects have a higher number than the alcove, then the compiler should pick this up and warn the user accordingly. If it's not important, then there's a bug here that needs fixing to allow objects to have any numbers.

Hope that makes sense!
User avatar
George Gilbert
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3022
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2000 11:04 am
Location: London, England
Contact:

Re: Extra compiler check required (v0.17)

Post by George Gilbert »

This is a bug in the main game code; the order of items shouldn't make any difference to whether it crashes or not!

I've fixed this and it will go in V0.18.

BTW - the numbers are totally irrelevant. If fact so much so they don't have to be numbers at all, they are just arbitary alphanumeric strings which uniquely identify that item so they can be referenced by the TRIGGER=(xxx) elements. I've just always used numbers because it's easier to see that they are unique!

What counts is the *order*that the items appear in the file.
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13769
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Extra compiler check required (v0.17)

Post by Gambit37 »

Ah, perhaps I should clarify: I both renumbered the items in the alcoves, and moved them down the file so that they appeared after the alcoves. It definitely doesn't work if they are higher up in the file than the alcoves.
User avatar
amaprotu
Adept
Posts: 211
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2001 9:47 pm
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Re: Extra compiler check required (v0.17)

Post by amaprotu »

<blockquote><b><i>Quote:</i></b><hr> BTW - the numbers are totally irrelevant. If fact so much so they don't have to be numbers at all, they are just arbitary alphanumeric strings which uniquely identify that item so they can be referenced by the TRIGGER=(xxx) elements. I've just always used numbers because it's easier to see that they are unique!<hr></blockquote>

Do I read this correctly that I could label an item ama003 or apple01 or door0101 or something if I wanted? If so, what is the max string length?
- Amaprotu
User avatar
George Gilbert
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3022
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2000 11:04 am
Location: London, England
Contact:

Re: Extra compiler check required (v0.17)

Post by George Gilbert »

Yes, that's correct, you could name them as you suggest.

In principle there's no upper limit to the length of each identifier string. However, each line must be less than 1000 characters long which, in practice, restricts the length of the identifier to about 950 characters; I trust you'll never get anywhere near that ;-)
User avatar
George Gilbert
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3022
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2000 11:04 am
Location: London, England
Contact:

Re: Extra compiler check required (v0.17)

Post by George Gilbert »

Fixed for V0.18
Post Reply