slot-ref-maybe-runcheck
val-or-run
- dyn-ref))
+ dyn-ref
+
+ ;; Some of the more common commands
+ cmd-take cmd-drop
+ cmd-take-from cmd-put-in))
;;; Gameobj
;;; =======
("drop" ((direct-command cmd-drop #:obvious? #f)))))
;; Most objects are generally visible by default
- (generally-visible #:init-value #t
- #:init-keyword #:generally-visible)
- ;; @@: Would be preferable to be using generic methods for this...
- ;; Hopefully we can port this to Guile 2.2 soon...
+ (invisible? #:init-value #f
+ #:init-keyword #:invisible?)
+ ;; TODO: Fold this into a procedure in invisible? similar
+ ;; to take-me? and etc
(visible-to-player?
#:init-value (wrap-apply gameobj-visible-to-player?))
(define (gameobj-visible-to-player? gameobj whos-looking)
"Check to see whether we're visible to the player or not.
By default, this is whether or not the generally-visible flag is set."
- (slot-ref gameobj 'generally-visible))
+ (not (slot-ref gameobj 'invisible?)))
(define* (gameobj-visible-name actor message #:key whos-looking)
;; Are we visible?
our-name)
#:exclude player))))
+;; @@: Moving this to a container subclass/mixin could allow a lot more
+;; customization of take out / put in phrases
(define* (cmd-take-from gameobj message
#:key direct-obj indir-obj preposition)
(define player (message-from message))
(mbody-val (<-wait player 'get-loc)))
(define our-name (slot-ref gameobj 'name))
;; We need to check if we even have such a thing
- (define thing-to-take
+ (define this-thing
(call/ec
(lambda (return)
(for-each (lambda (occupant)
(gameobj-occupants gameobj))
;; nothing found
#f)))
+ (define (this-thing-name)
+ (mbody-val (<-wait this-thing 'get-name)))
(define (should-take-from-me)
- (and thing-to-take
- (slot-ref-maybe-runcheck gameobj 'take-from-me? player thing-to-take)))
- ;; @@: Right now we give the same response to both something not being
- ;; an occupant and to not being permitted to be removed. This isn't
- ;; very rich and maybe not as helpful as it could be. Right now I'm
- ;; trying to avoid "leaking" information about if an object isn't there.
- ;; However maybe by making the different responses as slots which can be
- ;; set, this wouldn't be a problem.
- (define default-objection
- "As much as you'd like to take it, it doesn't seem like you can.")
- (define (thing-to-take-objection)
+ (and this-thing
+ (slot-ref-maybe-runcheck gameobj 'take-from-me? player this-thing)))
+ (define (default-objection)
+ `("Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like you can take "
+ (this-thing-name) " " preposition " " our-name "."))
+
+ (define (this-thing-objection)
(mbody-receive (_ taken-ok? #:key why-not) ; does the object object to being removed?
- (<-wait thing-to-take 'ok-to-be-taken-from? player) ; @@ no need to supply from where
+ (<-wait this-thing 'ok-to-be-taken-from? player) ; @@ no need to supply from where
(and (not taken-ok?)
;; Either give the specified reason, or give a boilerplate one
- (or why-not default-objection))))
+ (or why-not
+ (default-objection)))))
(cond
- ;; Is it not there, or maybe we won't allow it to be taken?
- ((or (not thing-to-take) (not (should-take-from-me)))
- (<- (message-from message) 'tell
- #:text default-objection))
+ ;; Wait, aren't we going to check (should-take-from-me) later?
+ ;; Well yes, but this checks if there's a #f as the value, which
+ ;; is a much clearer indication that this doesn't take *anything*.
+ ((not (slot-ref gameobj 'take-from-me?))
+ (<- player 'tell
+ #:text `("It's not really clear how to take something " ,preposition
+ " " ,our-name ".")))
+
+ ;; Unfortunately this does leak information about what is contained
+ ;; by us. Maybe not what's wanted in all circumstances.
+ ((not this-thing)
+ (<- player 'tell
+ #:text `("You don't see any such " ,direct-obj " to take from "
+ ,our-name ".")))
+ ;; A particular objection to taking this thing.
+ ;; We should allow customizing the reason here, which could be
+ ;; provided by the 'ok-to-be-taken-from? slot.
+ ((not (should-take-from-me))
+ (<- player 'tell
+ #:text (default-objection)))
;; the thing we wsant to take itself has objected...
- ((thing-to-take-objection) =>
+ ((this-thing-objection) =>
(lambda (objection)
- (<- (message-from message) 'tell
+ (<- player 'tell
#:text objection)))
;; looks like we can take it
(else
- (let ((thing-to-take-name
- (mbody-val (<-wait thing-to-take 'get-name))))
- ;; Wait to announce to the player just in case settting the location
- ;; errors out or something. Maybe it's overthinking things, I dunno.
- (<-wait thing-to-take 'set-loc! #:loc player)
- (<- player 'tell
- #:text `("You take " ,thing-to-take-name " from "
- ,our-name "."))
- (<- player-loc 'tell-room
- #:text `(,player-name " takes " ,thing-to-take-name " from "
- ,our-name "."))))))
+ ;; Wait to announce to the player just in case settting the location
+ ;; errors out or something. Maybe it's overthinking things, I dunno.
+ (<-wait this-thing 'set-loc! #:loc player)
+ (<- player 'tell
+ #:text `("You take " ,(this-thing-name) " from "
+ ,our-name "."))
+ (<- player-loc 'tell-room
+ #:text `(,player-name " takes " ,(this-thing-name) " from "
+ ,our-name ".")
+ #:exclude player))))
(define* (cmd-put-in gameobj message
#:key direct-obj indir-obj preposition)
(mbody-val (<-wait player 'get-occupants)))
;; nothing found
#f)))
+ (define (this-thing-name)
+ (mbody-val (<-wait this-thing 'get-name)))
(define (should-put-in-me)
(and this-thing
(slot-ref-maybe-runcheck gameobj 'put-in-me? player this-thing)))
- ;; @@: Right now we give the same response to both something not being
- ;; an occupant and to not being permitted to be removed. This isn't
- ;; very rich and maybe not as helpful as it could be. Right now I'm
- ;; trying to avoid "leaking" information about if an object isn't there.
- ;; However maybe by making the different responses as slots which can be
- ;; set, this wouldn't be a problem.
- (define default-objection
- "As much as you'd like to, it doesn't seem like you can put that in there.")
+ (define (default-objection)
+ `("As much as you'd like to, it doesn't seem like you can put "
+ ,(this-thing-name) " " ,preposition " " ,our-name "."))
(define (this-thing-objection)
(mbody-receive (_ put-in-ok? #:key why-not) ; does the object object to being moved?
(<-wait this-thing 'ok-to-be-put-in? player (actor-id gameobj))
(and (not put-in-ok?)
;; Either give the specified reason, or give a boilerplate one
- (or why-not default-objection))))
+ (or why-not (default-objection)))))
(cond
;; Is it not there, or maybe we won't allow it to be taken?
- ((or (not this-thing) (not (should-put-in-me)))
+ ((not this-thing)
(<- (message-from message) 'tell
- #:text default-objection))
+ #:text `("You don't seem to have any such " ,direct-obj " to put "
+ ,preposition " " ,our-name ".")))
+
+ ((or (not (should-put-in-me)))
+ (<- (message-from message) 'tell
+ #:text (default-objection)))
;; the thing we wsant to take itself has objected...
((this-thing-objection) =>
(lambda (objection)
#:text objection)))
;; looks like we can take it
(else
- (let ((this-thing-name
- (mbody-val (<-wait this-thing 'get-name))))
-
-
- ;; Wait to announce to the player just in case settting the location
- ;; errors out or something. Maybe it's overthinking things, I dunno.
- (<-wait this-thing 'set-loc! #:loc (actor-id gameobj))
- (<- player 'tell
- #:text `("You put " ,this-thing-name " in "
- ,our-name "."))
- (<- player-loc 'tell-room
- #:text `(,player-name " puts " ,this-thing-name " in "
- ,our-name "."))))))
+ ;; Wait to announce to the player just in case settting the location
+ ;; errors out or something. Maybe it's overthinking things, I dunno.
+ (<-wait this-thing 'set-loc! #:loc (actor-id gameobj))
+ (<- player 'tell
+ #:text `("You put " ,(this-thing-name) " " ,preposition " "
+ ,our-name "."))
+ (<- player-loc 'tell-room
+ #:text `(,player-name " puts " ,(this-thing-name) " " ,preposition " "
+ ,our-name ".")
+ #:exclude player))))
projects / mudsync.git / blobdiff