On Monday 07 February 2005 17:03, The Mage wrote:
> Perhaps by the time the connection is open and the initial
> web-request headers are read, it is too late to change this
> connection option? I have no control over the actual opening of the
> connection, since it is initiated by a web browser.
Y
On Monday 07 February 2005 12:30, The Mage wrote:
> When I send a form via the 'POST' method in both Camino and Safari on
> the Mac, the final line of the HTTP request is passed unterminated by
> a CR or LF ... and unfortunately this line contains all of the
> relevant POST data generated by the fo
On Tuesday 18 January 2005 19:50, Sean Davis wrote:
> Yes, they are. I was merely running the suggested evals. No need to "RTFM"
> at me. I'm quite aware that type names are integers. I merely found the
> results of those tests... curious... for lack of a better word.
I doubt he was trying to be r
On Tuesday 18 January 2005 17:44, Daniel Jung wrote:
> Please do this:
>
> eval me:tell(me ? "I exist" | "I don't exist")
>
> MOO objects don't seem to be "true", and I cannot see why. Could anyone
> enlighten me please. Both "banana", 14, {1,2,3} and #1 should exist.
Object numbers are always
On Monday 06 December 2004 16:05, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > Or nothing? I bet this behaviour could be emulated completely with
> > #0:do_command and force_input().
>
> The entire server parser probably could be. There are a whole lot of
> legacy warts in the MOO system, and this is one of them.
I
On Monday 06 December 2004 15:55, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Dr Robert Sanderson wrote:
> > Minor enhancement request:
> > * Remove the auto-aliases for " : ; into a simple configuration file.
> > (Eg to allow for ' " -> say ; : -> emote | -> eval)
>
> Probably should just be a server object control
On Monday 06 December 2004 12:15, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Is it just me, or does LambdaMOO seem to be orphanned?
It's not just you. :-)
#
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
T
On Monday 06 December 2004 10:32, Daniel Jung wrote:
[...]
> for c in (callers())
> block = [EMAIL PROTECTED], tostr(c[1], ":", c[2])};
> endfor
[...]
> Now I _really_ would like to get hold of the line, not only the object and
> verb name. Callers() wouldn't reveal the line; I can't
On Saturday 01 May 2004 16:54, Daniel Jung wrote:
> I'm tired of that. I'd wish I rather could
>
> string .= otherstring;
I would think that += would work for strings, since + already does.
> That would mean changing the files `unparse.c' and `code_gen.c'. Question:
> Has anyone bothered to c
On March 5, 2003 10:07 am, Luke-Jr wrote:
> The purpose of this group is to take the base C& language (as currently
> implemented by LambdaMOO 1.8.1) and decide on improvements to the
So what's "C&"? A different name for the MOO programming language, or
something else?
##
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
On February 1, 2003 02:37 am, Gavin Lambert wrote:
> At 01:27 31/01/2003 -0800, Andrew Wendt wrote:
> >binary = connection_option(who, "binary");
> >set_connection_option(who, "binary"
On January 30, 2003 11:05 pm, Peter Lees wrote:
> does anyone recall this sort of formatting, or are using it themselves?
> does anyone recall the patch and/or changes which can make this work ?
No, but if you want you could update your prompts so that the code would work
with any recent MOO ser
12 matches
Mail list logo
