[CF-Devel] object movers
Peter Mardahl
peterm at alfven.EECS.Berkeley.EDU
Sat Apr 7 13:34:21 CDT 2001
>
>
Is there really any fundamental difference between a mover and a teleporter?
>
>
I could probably make a good argument for a teleporter with all the same
>
options for selecting what gets teleported. Is there really any reason to
>
have a separate object?
Well, movers are very easy to set up in chains because they're directed.
I suppose you could do the same thing with a teleporter--but when I
first implemented it I considered it enough of a difference in
action not to add all this stuff to a teleporter but rather simply
create a new object, which would have all these extra properties
that a generic teleporter doesn't really need:
1) A habit of moving something 1 square instead of arbitrary,
the direction of motion being easily determined by where the mover points
2) the ability to FORCE whatever-it-is to move in that track by paralyzing
him
3) an ability to define the speed of movement
If you muck around and break the existing implementation, I expect you
to fix all the maps!
I think it's sensible to have a separate object rather than
some sort of monstrous, do-all teleporter....
I mean, why don't we get rid of "teleporters" and simply put all
mover and teleporter functionality into an exit????
PeterM
>
I guess I would argue that the best way to decide if you should have one
>
object type or several is to figure out which way leaves you with better
>
code. If you're reusing most of the same code for two different objects,
>
it's probably better to have a single object. If you're having too many
>
conditionals, then it might be time to split it into multiple objects.
>
>
Of course, that's rather subjective.
Well, I'm definitely on the side of a separate object for
exits, movers, and teleporters. I think they're all different "enough".
PeterM
More information about the crossfire
mailing list