>But I can fix that, that's not the reason for this email. What I've been
>wondering is, is it really worth it to convert the mud to c++ just so I can
>turn char_data, room_data, obj_data and others into classes? Other then
>'cleaner looking' code, is there really any advantage? Like the potential
>for more flexability in making things do stuff?
There's a lot more potential, in that if you convert to classes, you can
use accessor functions, such as name() to get mName value. This lets a
class apply modifiers without too much code. For example, if "Xane" is
polymorphed into "a dragon", mName could store "Xane" like it normally
would, mPolyData.mName would store "a dragon" and name() would return "a
dragon" instead of "Xane" because Xane is polymorphed... get it? Lots of
potential... unfortunately, it requires a lot of rewriting.
Judson Powers powers@rjsonline.net
Morgaelin MUD telnet mud.dwango.com 3000
Be aware of all things;
Endure all things;
Be removed from all things.
-- 3 Druidic Virtues of Widsom
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST