Any time you change the calls to something you have to change the
declares to it. This is what he wants
Currently, damage is set to show actually 6 arguments. He wants to add a
7th to it. This can NOT be done without redefining damage. By redefining
damage you HAVE to redefine all the calls to said function.
Go ahead, try to compile it here. You'll get a nice little error that
says" Too many arguments to function "damage", as it's written right
here".
In fact, I just tried it (though I KNEW you were wrong, I tried it
anyways).I added just another random argument (a boolean statement) to
the EXACT call he wanted to do it to.. Woops, you're wrong. You can NOT
randomly insert arguments in ANY function like that. That's like writing
the following function and expecting it to work.
void foo(CHAR_DATA *ch, char *argument)
{
blah
return;
}
and somewhere inside of your code, adding the call to foo as :
foo(ch, buf2,
heyIjustwannarandomlyinsertthingsinhereandhopeandpraymycompilertakesitwell);
Or, even better,in your case, it'd be like (I wanna randomly insert
arguments anywhere and pray they work correctly **chuckle**)
foo(buf2,ch);
then HOPING that the ch works, right?? Nope!!! Aint gonna cut it!!!
On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 14:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Huh? You can change the functionality of a damage() type function without
> even touching all the calls and protoypes.
>
> The same way act() and act_new() works...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Whiting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Easy answer, I'm just braindead right now
>
>
>
> > damage( ch, victim, fKill?number_range(low,high) :
> > UMIN(blah), (fourth_argument), DAM_NONE, TRUE);
> >
> > What will I put for the fourth argument in the damage
> > line? I know this is a simple answer, I'm just brain
> > dead right now :P Thanks.
> > -Matt
>
> So easy, in fact that you'll kick yourself once you hear the answer.
> First, you need to realize that changing damage itself will invalidate
> all functions requiring damage. You're not after mpdamage being changed
> in the previous example, you're after damage() being changed(big big big
> difference), and a HELL of a lot more work.
> Now, why are you trying to insert the fourth argument in the MIDDLE of
> everything? Put it at the END, where it should be. Why? Here's why:
> Everything in damage() already works as is, out of the box, no?
> Inserting crap in the MIDDLE of the statement or call to it will just
> SERIOUSLY screw up your calls to the damage function (as if they
> wouldn't be already by changing the damage code itself). Put
> fourth_argument where it should be, at the END of the damage call!!
> Remember, you have to not only change the calls to damage(), you ALSO
> have to change the declaration of it in merc.h (if one exists), and ALL
> other declarations of it.
--
TJW :Head tech, designer, bum:P
Mud :http://dreamless.wolfstream.net
telnet :telnet://dreamless.wolfstream.net 9275
OLC Pages:http://olc.wolfstream.net
