Re: Olympia Stacking 'Gotcha'

From: cedman@714-725-3177.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)

Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1992 18:08:37 +0000

In my ongoing series of Suggestions Which Everybody Hates (TM), let me
ask this question: :-)

Why aren't stacks hierarchical ?

Representing the world by objects, each of which has one 'container'
(which might in turn have another container aso.) is fairly popular
among players and implementors of MUDs, easy and intuitive to
understand and program, easily extensible and seems to be pretty
realistic. But for some reason which is not obvious to me the Great God
Atnerks has chosen to represent regions/structurs/stacks/physical
objects all differently.

To apply this to the example at hand, stacks would not necessarily
consist out of units, but out of units and sub-stacks (each of which
might have sub-stacks ad infinitum). If a stack leader issues a STACK
command, his entire stack joins the target stack, but not as
individuals but as a single sub-stack. If this stack leader later on
unstacks from the stack he stacked with before, his entire sub-stack
remains intact and with him. This would be the intuitive behaviour and
the one which a superficial reader of the docs would expect (although I
think they are clear on the fact that this is not so, if you read
carefully).

Carl Edman, BtA

References

Olympia Stacking 'Gotcha'
rsocia@renaissance.cray.com (Rick Socia)
Mon, 08 Jun 1992 11:19:33 +0000

Referenced By

Olympia Stacking 'Gotcha'
rsocia@renaissance.cray.com (Rick Socia)
Mon, 08 Jun 1992 11:19:33 +0000