Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Vanilla

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 10, 2011, 03:29   #11
Max Stats
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 324
Max Stats is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnate View Post
But that wouldn't address your use case, would it? What you want is to be able to carry both items in your inventory (one to use, one to sell/recharge) without the charges merging. I don't think there's an easy way to do that.
I would be happy leaving the empty behind and just carrying the charged one. I can't say that every user would feel the same, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnate View Post
Besides, adding special-case code for pickup commands would be icky.
I wondered about that. I don't suppose that the pickup code currently cares whether it was called from auto-pickup or manual pickup, and this would require differentiating them. I guess this would be almost as icky as keeping track of each item separately.
Max Stats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10, 2011, 09:33   #12
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,060
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Stats View Post
I wondered about that. I don't suppose that the pickup code currently cares whether it was called from auto-pickup or manual pickup, and this would require differentiating them. I guess this would be almost as icky as keeping track of each item separately.
Ah, I meant to distinguish "icky" from "difficult". Keeping track of each item separately is a laudable aim, if perhaps a dubious ROI. Writing special-case code for manual pickup is not difficult, but is the kind of thing that the real programmers on the devteam would not be happy about!
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila
Magnate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10, 2011, 14:59   #13
buzzkill
Prophet
 
buzzkill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 2,939
Donated: $8
buzzkill is on a distinguished road
While I'm not fluent in C and have no knowledge of the Angband code-base, which is where I suspect the majority of the problem lies, how hard would it be to just expand the inventory slots behind the scenes and then consolidate the info when displayed.

In this way we could stack other things. CLW,CSW,CCW and healing could stack. Slow poison and Neut poison could stack. Same-type rings but with different pvals.
__________________
www.mediafire.com/buzzkill - Get your 32x32 tiles here. UT32 now compatible Ironband and Quickband 9/6/2012.
My banding life on Buzzkill's ladder.
buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10, 2011, 19:20   #14
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,060
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzkill View Post
While I'm not fluent in C and have no knowledge of the Angband code-base, which is where I suspect the majority of the problem lies, how hard would it be to just expand the inventory slots behind the scenes and then consolidate the info when displayed.

In this way we could stack other things. CLW,CSW,CCW and healing could stack. Slow poison and Neut poison could stack. Same-type rings but with different pvals.
It's hideous, honestly. The inventory slots are hard-coded #defines!! We need a completely different approach to inventory management, which is a low-level rewrite. It's connected with (but not identical to) the rewrite of the o_list[] array - one of those (numerous) situations where you wouldn't do one without the other, and they're both big jobs without much in the way of satisfying development.
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila
Magnate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10, 2011, 21:02   #15
Max Stats
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 324
Max Stats is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnate View Post
It's hideous, honestly. The inventory slots are hard-coded #defines!! We need a completely different approach to inventory management, which is a low-level rewrite. It's connected with (but not identical to) the rewrite of the o_list[] array - one of those (numerous) situations where you wouldn't do one without the other, and they're both big jobs without much in the way of satisfying development.
I know we're not really going there now, but if such a rewrite is ever undertaken, I have always thought that the number of inventory slots should be unlimited (or at least large enough to almost never be reached) but that the number of items that can be carried should be constrained by volume. So in addition to weight, each item would be given a volume and once the total volume of your pack is exceeded, the item that was just added will overflow, just like slot 'x' does now. This solves the nonsense that you can carry 99 scrolls of the same type, but not 24 scrolls of different types, or that the same pack that maxes out at 23 distinct potions can also hold 23 sets of full plate armor.

After that we would get to argue about whether max volume should be fixed for all characters, variable by race/class but otherwise fixed, or variable by some combination of DEX, CLev, race, class, etc. What fun!
Max Stats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10, 2011, 21:35   #16
d_m
Angband Devteam member
 
d_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
Age: 41
Posts: 1,516
d_m is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Stats View Post
I know we're not really going there now, but if such a rewrite is ever undertaken, I have always thought that the number of inventory slots should be unlimited (or at least large enough to almost never be reached) but that the number of items that can be carried should be constrained by volume.
If you ever played Quarterstaff: The Tombs of Setmoth [1] it used this mechanic. I found it to be basically OK although occasionally it could be confusing to figure out which thing(s) you needed to drop to pick something else up.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarter...omb_of_Setmoth
__________________
linux->xterm->screen->pmacs
d_m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11, 2011, 13:13   #17
dos350
Knight
 
dos350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: nimbin, australia
Posts: 542
dos350 is on a distinguished road
sorry but i rofld,
__________________
~eek

Reality hits you -more-

S+++++++++++++++++++
dos350 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11, 2011, 14:06   #18
Remuz
Apprentice
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 77
Remuz is on a distinguished road
pls no rage ~~
Remuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11, 2011, 23:23   #19
JohnCW9
Adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 118
JohnCW9 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Stats View Post
I know we're not really going there now, but if such a rewrite is ever undertaken, I have always thought that the number of inventory slots should be unlimited (or at least large enough to almost never be reached) but that the number of items that can be carried should be constrained by volume. So in addition to weight, each item would be given a volume and once the total volume of your pack is exceeded, the item that was just added will overflow, just like slot 'x' does now. This solves the nonsense that you can carry 99 scrolls of the same type, but not 24 scrolls of different types, or that the same pack that maxes out at 23 distinct potions can also hold 23 sets of full plate armor.

After that we would get to argue about whether max volume should be fixed for all characters, variable by race/class but otherwise fixed, or variable by some combination of DEX, CLev, race, class, etc. What fun!
There used to be a varirant that was call some thing like realband that I tried once and it gave you only so much room.
JohnCW9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11, 2011, 23:46   #20
Raxmei
Apprentice
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 94
Raxmei is on a distinguished road
Kamband gave you unlimited slots but reduced your weight limit.
Raxmei is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Half-burned torches for sale!" Zero Vanilla 18 February 26, 2008 16:32


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.