On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 05:39:18PM -0500, Mike Caron wrote: > On 7/20/07, James Paige <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 05:36:04PM -0500, Mike Caron wrote: > > > On 7/20/07, James Paige <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 05:28:16PM -0500, Mike Caron wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No no, make the type named. The Union should be anonymous. > > > > > > > > > > (actually, there is no place in the code that actually uses the stat > > > > > names, so we could just turf that) > > > > > > > > But they would be really nice to have in a lot of places. They would > > > > make the battle code especially a lot cleaner. > > > > > > > > I am not sure which is greater: the number of places where we need to > > > > access stats as an array, or the number of places where we need to > > > > access them individually... > > > > > > To be frank, there are only a few places where they would need to be > > > accessed by name. Mostly in the attack damage routine, and inns. > > > > > > Right now, there isn't any place. But, I set the Stats UDT up for > > > future reuse in other applications, so... hmm... I wonder if we could > > > get away with naming it "sta", so that we can do this: > > > > > > her.sta.hp > > > her.sta(0) > > > > > > How about her.st.hp and her.sta(0)? > > Win. It works for me.
Okay, I'll do it now. --- James Paige _______________________________________________ ohrrpgce mailing list [email protected] http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org
