Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Jason Flatt <jason AT flattfamily.com>]

On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:43 pm, Eric Sandall wrote:
> Quoting Jason Flatt <jason AT flattfamily.com>:
> > I'd be okay with just a message or a query.  (Although, offering to
> > automatically dispel (defaulting to 'n') would be a nice addition.)
> >
> > Thinking about this thread, it occurs to me that there's really two
> > issues here:
> > 1)  Spell X depends on spell Y.  Dispelling X offers to dispel Y (or at
> > least
>
> Only if X is the only application that depends on Y, but #2 may cover
> that...circular?

I was using simple examples to bring to light that there are two issues to 
look at.  Probably using a simple if [codex_does_spell_exist "$spell" && 
show_depends "$spell"]; then... (or an if ! [...) (take from 
gaze_show_depends() in gaze) would be sufficient.

> > informs).
> > 2)  Spell X depends on spell Y.  Dispelling Y resists until a --force
> > flag is
> >
> > used or X is dispelled (which then moves back to point 1).
>
> Pretty much, yep. Also of note would be if you do force the dispelling of
> Y, and X stays (or even if it doesn't), and then something comes along to
> be cast that indirectly depends on Y, then Y should be recast, but this
> would slow things down as Sorcery would have to check every direct and
> indirect dependency.

I would think that would be handled under the normal running of cast as it is 
now.  Not any different than we do it now manually dispelling dependencies.

> -sandalle

-- 
Jason Flatt (jason @ flattfamily . com)
Father of five (http://www.flattfamily.com/)
Linux user (http://www.sourcemage.org/)
IRC Nick: Oadae  Channels: #sourcemage, #lvlug  Server: irc.freenode.net

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS/IT d(-) s+:- a>++++ C++$(+++) UL++++ P(+) L+++ E- W++ N+@ o? K? w-- O? 
M-- V PS- PE+ Y+ PGP@ t 5+ X R tv--() b+@ DI+@ D+++ G e h---- r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------