In response to Lummox JR
Yeah, it's definitely a good thing to have lists that can contain anything. I don't see why there couldn't be both strongly(ish)-typed and weakly-typed lists, though - the list type could be optional, and if it wasn't present then member access on the list would be disallowed, as it is now. I don't know how easy or otherwise that would be to program, but I can't think of any major stumbling blocks.
In response to Crispy
Instead of having lists as either typed or untyped, why not just introduce a new datum?

/list

/array

Forgive me if that is the exact same thing that you were suggesting, Crispy.

[Edit: Now that I think of it, the only reason to have strongly-typed arrays would be so that we could access them with the '.' and ':' operators, something that DM doesn't have. Drat, another usless post on my part -_-]
In response to IainPeregrine
IainPeregrine wrote:
Instead of having lists as either typed or untyped, why not just introduce a new datum?
[...]
Forgive me if that is the exact same thing that you were suggesting, Crispy.

It isn't - I meant this:

var/list/AddAnythingToMe
var/list/mob/AddOnlyMobsToMe

world << AddAnythingToMe[1].name // ERROR, won't compile; untyped list
world << AddOnlyMobsToMe[1].name // Works; only mobs can be in this list, and all mobs have a 'name' var


I don't see much point in introducing a new type just for this, as you mentioned in your edit.
Page: 1 2