Crossfire Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CF: cone bug fix

It would be real nice if the recommended patch/change included a
few sentences saying what was believed to be wrong and the effect of the
change.  And these sentences should be incorporated into the code so
there aren't future confusions.

I am not getting after anyone in particular since the original code
change was not well documented.  It woiuld be a much better practice,
in general, if changes which aren't clearly self documenting (for
instance, using safe string routines instead of unsafe routines is
self documenting, but using object's head vs current object is not)
have supporting comments explaining the purpose of the change.

Or I suppose this patch can be incorporated and undone in version .97 or
so when the problem of not using the head is rediscovered.



Date: 	Tue, 5 May 1998 18:41:22 +0200
From: Christian Stieber <>
Subject: CF: cone bug fix


I'm not very familiar with the spell implementation, but it seems
the cone bug can be fixed by undoing one of changes made in 0.94.1.
In spell_util.c/ok_to_put_more, the line

    if((QUERY_FLAG(head, FLAG_ALIVE) && head->immune & immune_stop) ||

must be replaced with

    if((QUERY_FLAG(op, FLAG_ALIVE) && head->immune & immune_stop) ||

Not sure whether this has other side effects, though :-(

[to unsubscribe etc., send mail to ]