Bump(mob/M)

ID:266260
 
Oct 21 2001, 10:02 am
when I do:
mob
Bump(mob/M)
usr<<"You bumped [M]
it works, but when I bump into a dense turf its says that why? I didn't call it for turfs...did I?
Oct 21 2001, 10:07 am
I didn't call it for turfs...did I?

Actually, you just told it that M will *normally* be a mob. Anything that you bump into is stuck into Bump() as the argument.

You have to use if(ismob(M)) to make sure that what you're bumping is a mob.
Oct 21 2001, 10:08 am
In response to Spuzzum
Spuzzum wrote:
I didn't call it for turfs...did I?

Actually, you just told it that M will *normally* be a mob. Anything that you bump into is stuck into Bump() as the argument.

You have to use if(ismob(M)) to make sure that what you're bumping is a mob.

Ok, thats stupid, but thanks!
Oct 21 2001, 10:14 am
In response to Air _King
Ok, thats stupid, but thanks!

No, it's not stupid. What if I decided to write two versions of the same proc?

mob/Bump(mob/M)
..()
usr << "Blah."

mob/Bump(turf/T)
for(var/mob/M in T)
M << "Blih."

This would say Blah to the user, but it would also say Blih to everyone inside a bumped turf.
Oct 21 2001, 10:23 am
In response to Spuzzum
Spuzzum wrote:
Ok, thats stupid, but thanks!

No, it's not stupid. What if I decided to write two versions of the same proc?

mob/Bump(mob/M)
..()
usr << "Blah."

mob/Bump(turf/T)
for(var/mob/M in T)
M << "Blih."

This would say Blah to the user, but it would also say Blih to everyone inside a bumped turf.

what exactly is ..() i have used it, but never really understod it
Oct 21 2001, 10:46 am
In response to Air _King
Air _King wrote:
Spuzzum wrote:
Ok, thats stupid, but thanks!

No, it's not stupid. What if I decided to write two versions of the same proc?

mob/Bump(mob/M)
..()
usr << "Blah."

mob/Bump(turf/T)
for(var/mob/M in T)
M << "Blih."

This would say Blah to the user, but it would also say Blih to everyone inside a bumped turf.

what exactly is ..() i have used it, but never really understod it

Whoops, that ..() should have actually been in the second proc.

Anyway, what ..() does is run what the procedure originally does.

So if I do this:

mob/Login()
..()
world << "[usr] logged in!"

I'm basically telling it to run the normal Login() proc (which puts the user on the map) and then add some additional functionality, a message.


If I do this:

mob/proc/whatever()
usr << "Yadda."

mob/special_mob/whatever()
..()
usr << "And Yidda too!"

then that means to run the first version (which says Yadda) and then add an additional message if src is a special_mob. When you don't include the "..()" it is called overriding. Otherwise, you are just adding to the proc.
Oct 21 2001, 2:38 pm
In response to Spuzzum
Spuzzum wrote:
Ok, thats stupid, but thanks!

No, it's not stupid. What if I decided to write two versions of the same proc?

mob/Bump(mob/M)
..()
usr << "Blah."

mob/Bump(turf/T)
for(var/mob/M in T)
M << "Blih."

This would say Blah to the user, but it would also say Blih to everyone inside a bumped turf.

Wait a minute, DM lets you do this sorta thing now? Last time I tried I got duplicate definition errors :P.
Oct 21 2001, 3:27 pm
In response to Theodis
Wait a minute, DM lets you do this sorta thing now? Last time I tried I got duplicate definition errors :P.

You should be able to.

I think in your case you did

mob/proc/whatever()

mob/proc/whatever()

when you should have done:

mob/proc/whatever()

mob/whatever()
Oct 21 2001, 5:21 pm
In response to Spuzzum
Spuzzum wrote:
Wait a minute, DM lets you do this sorta thing now? Last time I tried I got duplicate definition errors :P.

You should be able to.

I think in your case you did

mob/proc/whatever()

mob/proc/whatever()

In C++ it'll let you do this provided the 2 functions vary in parameters, and that was the functionality I thought you were refering to.
Oct 21 2001, 8:32 pm
In response to Theodis
In C++ it'll let you do this provided the 2 functions vary in parameters, and that was the functionality I thought you were refering to.

Gah, mention not that foul thing of evil!