> > >> The ATCK command makes the robot attack another robot at a neighbouring
> > >> square.
> > >
> > > What if there is no robot in that square? Is the empty square attacked or
> > > is there no attack at all? Since attacking costs a turn, there is a
> > > difference.
> >
> > IMHO, the empty square should be attacked, regardless of whether the square
> > is actually occupied or not and it takes a turn. Question is whether you
> > will lose energy attacking an empty square...
>
> I'd say it would result in dropping the energy on the square, so you can
> pick it up afterward. This would imply the DROP command becomes obsolete.
The DROP command can drop a variable amount of energy. An
invalid attack costs a fixed amount of energy. Right?
> This is, IMHO, a good thing. (simlicity)
Simplicity is not the same as compactness. By "misusing" constructs
to eliminate others, the design does not become simpler.
Bye,
Maarten
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put
in the body (not subject) "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the
quotes :-) Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] (www.stack.nl/~wiebe/mailinglist/)
****
