Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

80885Re: [Devon][CODE] [FREQ] p7+ trackers - 10/31/04

Expand Messages
  • taluroniscandar
    Nov 2 5:25 AM
      --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Devon Jones <soulcatcher@e...> wrote:
      > Stefan Radermacher wrote:
      >
      > >√Čric Beaudoin wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >>For the record, Tir talks for all the senior data monkeys on this
      > >>issue. Any functionality linked to a TYPE (especially the hardcoded
      > >>ones) should be seen as Evil(tm).
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > >Currently the way PCGen chooses which kind of equipment gets listed in
      > >the chooses for free clothing ist by looking at the TYPE, it lists all
      > >equiupment witht the TYPE "Clothing.Resizable", and I don't really
      see a
      > >way to do something like that differently currently.
      > >
      > >Also, I'm wondering, what good is the TYPE qualifier if not for
      linking
      > >functionality to it? How else is the program supposed to differentiate
      > >between different kinds of equipment items? How else would PCGen be
      able
      > >to know that you can't use a lantern as a weapon or a sword as armor?
      > >
      > >Stefan.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > I have to weigh in here, and say that I agree with Stefan. We
      *have* to
      > refer to specific types in code, otherwise there is no way for us to
      > know how this stuff can affect anything.
      >
      > Sorry, it may be ugly, but there really is no other viable way.
      This is
      > what TYPE is *for*
      >
      > I am btw open to other suggestions, but really, any suggestion needs to
      > include eliminating TYPE, because that is it's primary code function -
      > to be a filter on items or other things for the code.

      I agree, TYPE as a function can't be removed.

      What about changing TYPE in items to ITEMTYPE (or some such), TYPE in
      feats to FEATTYPE, TYPE in classes to CLASSTYPE, etc, etc.

      Would solve both problems (but have alot of up front costs).
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic