[58] in Coldmud discussion meeting

root meeting help first first in chain previous in chain previous next last

Re: rehash: heirarchy

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fri Nov 19 20:29:10 1993 )

Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 18:22:09 -0600 (MDT)
From: Lynx <BRANDON@cc.usu.edu>
To: coldstuff@MIT.EDU

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

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

:feels picked on
Lynx feels picked on

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

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


> 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?