I did a check through the code, and there is no code that would be
compromised by changing CON_DISCONNECT to 18 and adding a CON before it.
If All OLC states are after CON_DISCONNECT, there is no problem adding
one
before CON_DISCONNECT.
again, less code and no need for macro's.
"Jon A. Nielsen" wrote:
>
> > A side note for your last email, if you add more olc states, you will
> > have to fix
> > the IS_BUILDING macro..
> > Thats why I put it as > CON_DISCONNECT, cause all OLC states above it.
> > No fixing or using of macros.
>
> Naturally.
>
> What happens if you add a CON_ state other than an OLC state, then add an
> OLC state? :)
>
> Either way works perfectly fine.
>
> ___
> Jon A. Nielsen
> Lazarus of Spear of Insanity MUD
> spear.kilnar.com:1066
> http://spear.kilnar.com/
>
> +------------------------------------------------------------+
> | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
> | http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html |
> +------------------------------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/10/01 PDT