<HEAD><TITLE>discuss@charon: [58] in "Coldmud discussion meeting"</TITLE>
<H1>[58] in Coldmud discussion meeting</H1></HEAD>
<A HREF="/"><IMG SRC="/i-d.gif" ALT="root"></A>
<A HREF="?58"><IMG SRC="/i-back.gif" ALT="meeting"></A>
<A HREF="/help.html"><IMG SRC="/i-help.gif" ALT="help"></A>
<A HREF="1"><IMG SRC="/i-first.gif" ALT="first"></A>
<A HREF="50"><IMG SRC="/i-fref.gif" ALT="first in chain"></A>
<A HREF="56"><IMG SRC="/i-pref.gif" ALT="previous in chain"></A>
<A HREF="57"><IMG SRC="/i-prev.gif" ALT="previous"></A>
<A HREF="59"><IMG SRC="/i-next.gif" ALT="next"></A>
<IMG SRC="/n-nref.gif" ALT="">
<IMG SRC="/n-lref.gif" ALT="">
<A HREF="1641"><IMG SRC="/i-last.gif" ALT="last"></A>
<HR><H2>Re: rehash: heirarchy</H2>
<H3>daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fri Nov 19 20:29:10 1993
)</H3>
<PRE>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 18:22:09 -0600 (MDT)
From: Lynx &lt;BRANDON@cc.usu.edu&gt;
To: coldstuff@MIT.EDU
X-Vms-To: COLDSTUFF

&gt; [snip--comments on $container]
&gt;
&gt; Just to expand a little on an earlier comment, since Jay doesn't seem
&gt; to want to flame about this right now:
&gt;
&gt; The relation between me and the hat I am wearing is not the same as
&gt; the relation between a bottle and the water it contains.  I am a
&gt; container in that my spleen is inside me, but I don't think that's
&gt; what most people intend when they make users descendants of
&gt; containers.
&gt;
&gt; It would be nice to be able to consider these relations separately.

I had this same comment, when I first saw this, but I have since changed my
mind.  Think about it, would you create a totally different class called
$holder, even though it would be basically a complete mirror of $container?
They do essentially the same thing...hrm...

&gt;&gt; Also, WHAT are you going on about with the $user thing?  
&gt;
&gt; Yes, Lynx, why is $person renamed to $user in your diagram?
&gt;

:feels picked on
Lynx feels picked on

&gt; Hm, after a little preliminary thinking, here's my attempt at a
&gt; user/robot hierarchy (whee, ascii art!):
&gt;
&gt; Sigh.  The idea here is to separate "an object which has &lt;rpg,
&gt; building, programming&gt; commands available" from "an object which
&gt; handles connections and represents an actual user."  So $character,
&gt; $builder, and $programmer each are determined solely by their
&gt; inheritance from $user and a person class.
&gt; 
&gt; $person means "an object which executes commands" and basically acts
&gt; like a person in some sense, whether a robot or a real user.

well, basically it comes down to I was thinking of $person and $user as one
thing, and everybody else and their dog (even some roaches) were thinking of
something else.  My concept of $user is basically the same thing as everybody
else is thinking of $person.  I'll change it to everybody else's perception
before I get some more rotten tomatoes thrown at me :)

&gt; Not everyone wants RPG functionality, so $rpg_person and $character
&gt; should be easily detachable; $building_person should inherit from
&gt; $person or $rpg_person if it exists, and $guest should inherit from
&gt; $user or $character.

Actually, i've thought about it even more, and with the $command_repository
there really is no reason for anything other than $person, although adding
$character or some other such object isnt too bad of an idea, everything else
can be off $command_repositories (which is essentially there to create
structure amoung all the uncountable amounts of Methods/commands etc we will
have.  We can just create a $builder_CR, $divine_CR, and whatever else, $guest
can simply be a $person without the $builder or divine CR's...

-Lynx/Brandon/Me.

&gt; BTW, stuffing everything into a flat namespaces is really lame.

(Lynx hears a plane soar _miles_ above his head)

Mind if I ask what your referring to here?
</PRE>
