Follow-up Comment #11, bug #8522 (project wesnoth):
The desire to have a unique identifier for each unit would IMO best be
fulfilled by introducing a new key (identifier= or something like that), not
by using description=. This was actually discussed a little bit on IRC a
while ago, and there are several problems with that, too (like does the game
need to ensure you don't create several identifier-identical units via WML
and so on). However, units being uniquely identifiable is not currently
especially needed, so I'd rather wait for a "proper" fix instead of a
description= hack that requires changes to WML in several places (perhaps
mostly UMC, but still).
So, unfortunately, I wouldn't really want things to be left working the way
your fix works. It demands special name handling (like you did for undead)
for all nameless races while still not actually giving a definite guarantee
that units will be uniquely identifiable by it (since it's not all that
uncommon, I suppose, to assing the same description= to multiple units in a
scenario for filtering or whatever purposes).
Therefore, I'd rather have things reverted so that the descriptions and names
of units aren't touched automatically in any way (except of course when giving
the unit a random name, but that only affects user_description=). I'm all for
having unique identifiers for units, but I think that feature needs enough
thought otherwise already that adding a new key to support it should be a
relatively minor part of the feature.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://gna.org/bugs/?8522>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Gna!
http://gna.org/
_______________________________________________
Wesnoth-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-bugs
