Zugg Software :: View topic - [2.05] Question about %case and variables (data and normal)

Novice Joined: 12 Oct 2006 Posts: 49

Using the example given in the manual for %case,

#VAR Greeting %case(%random(1,4),"Hi","Hello","Hiya","Hail")

when doing #SHOW @Greeting, it works perfectly displaying Hi or Hello and so on. However, I want to use this same function within a data variable, but I cannot get it to print out the words. It gives me to whole %case.

This is what I have
#ADDKEY Phrases Greeting {%case(%random(1,4),"Hi","Hello","Hiya","Hail")}

is there any way I can get #SHOW @{Phrases.Greeting} to display Hi or Hello, etc, without assigning it to another variable?

Thanks.

Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:57 pm

I don't think so. What you are actually doing in the example is creating a variable function. That was old zMUD/CMUD way of doing functions.

It was designed (and I don't think it's possible) to put that into a database variable.

Sorry.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 1:33 am

Try this:

#ADDKEY Phrases Greeting "%case(%random(1,4),~"Hi~",~"Hello~",~"Hiya~",~"Hail~")"

Which'll put the literal string into the variable, turning it into a #varfunc, which'll hopefully be evaluated properly when you do #show @phrases.greeting - if that doesn't work, try using %eval as well.

Novice Joined: 12 Oct 2006 Posts: 49

Both dont work. It displays the whole %case() to the screen.

Enchanter Joined: 09 Sep 2007 Posts: 605

Make a function setting with parameter. Here what I did

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 4:24 am

That'd be fine if he didn't want to keep the function in a data record variable, I guess to avoid clutter. You could always just name your functions Phrases_Whatever.

You also shouldn't need to do %eval(30) since that just returns 30, and I'm not sure if it's intended for functions to work without using #return.

You do however need %eval to get this working. My previous example works as long as you do %eval(@Phrases.Greeting) - it also works without the escaped quotes. But if your objective was to make something usable from the command line, you might be better off using a series of real functions with underscores instead of database keys.

Novice Joined: 12 Oct 2006 Posts: 49

hm..I see what you mean now. I've looked over my code again, I had misunderstood and tried the %eval inside the variable itself, which obviously didnt work. Now I've tried it onto the #show itself and I understand what you mean. I think I can make use of that. Thank you all for your replies.

PS Lina is really a female name Confused

I promise.

Enchanter Joined: 09 Sep 2007 Posts: 605

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 1:19 pm

Real functions are in since 2.00. The #function command now creates proper functions, and the #return command gives returns from those functions. The old function command is now #varfunc. There's a new "function" setting type, which is what you've posted there. Notice that it's <func> and not <var> like a varfunc would be.

Wizard Joined: 11 Jul 2002 Posts: 1265 Location: USA

Zugg DID implement real functions.

#func AddOne {#return (%1+1)}
#show @addone(7)

Displays 8 on the screen.

That was just a simple example though. These new REAL functions can contain anything that you would normally place into an alias.

The differences from aliases are that you can use #Return to return your results or not.
And that you must use the @Name(Paramaters) syntax.

Take a look at the help file functions.

Edit: Sliced to ribbons by Fang Confused

Enchanter Joined: 09 Sep 2007 Posts: 605

Thanks! Now I remember that I red about new functions in online manual when start my work with that function, but than stuck with local help and forget what I'd read earlier. It is strange that #FUNCTION still works without using #RETURN though, pretty much as #VARFUNC does. Or may be it should be considered as "power of CMUD"? Very Happy

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

Arde, does your example work on CMUD 2.0x? Cos it looks like an old function (now varfunc)...

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 3:04 pm

It does indeed. I'm guessing that there's an implicit return if the function is only one line long and contains no commands.

Enchanter Joined: 09 Sep 2007 Posts: 605

Seb
I never had CMUD 1.xx at all. So all examples are from 2.03 or later.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 5:05 pm

Functions basically return whatever is left on the internal stack. So if you just leave a value by itself without #RETURN, then it's still on the stack, although that is a bit undefined because it might also get sent to the MUD like in an Alias in a future version. So don't depend upon the implicit #RETURN...always put #RETURN in yourself.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 5:15 pm

Yeah, I saw some strange behaviour with this:

#func test {%case(%1,one,two,three,four,five)
%case(%1,five,four,three,two,one)}
#say @test(2)

Displays "ERROR: argument still on stack: four" and "four" like #say, and sends "two" to the MUD.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:10 pm

Yep. That's because a function can only return a single value, and since you have two %case statements, it ends up with two things on the stack instead of just one.

In any case, it's good to be more formal with scripts and use #RETURN to return the result of the function and use #SEND within a function when you want to send something to the MUD. Then there is no ambiguity.

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

Functions can (now) send stuff to the MUD? I wouldn't have guessed that! Though I suppose I might have done if I had considered that you can use any # command in a function. Is that true? - Can we use any # command in a function now? So it's basically an alias that you can't call from the command line, have to supply arguments to, and returns a value?

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:24 pm

Functions can now run commands, yes... that's the whole point of the change Confused

You don't have to supply arguments if your function doesn't require any, and you can still call them from the command line with #call. But it stops you from calling them accidentally, yes.

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:55 am

Fang is correct...*any* command can be used. They *do* have their own scope in that Functions can have their own local variables, for example. But there wasn't any reason to restrict what commands could be called.

After all, this is really true in any other language too. In PHP, for example, you can still call any PHP function from within your own function. If there was a "send()" function in PHP, then you could still call it from your own function. You can still call "echo()" in your PHP function to send something to the screen/web page, etc. So I'm not sure what you mean by other languages limited what functions can do...I've never run into anything like that.

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

Yeah, I think the old zMUD "functions" were still in my thoughts and causing me to be narrow-minded, and led me to slightly confuse an object method with a function (where an object method would not usually affect other unrelated objects).