I’ve got a simple example I’m working on, but when I run the game, it complains with a programming error. Is this a bug? From what I am reading in the manual, it seems like this should work.
>x alice
[** Programming error: tried to find the "." of (something) **]
[** Programming error: tried to read (something) **]
not so sure.
Here is the full code:
“Transformation”
Your place is a room.
Form is a kind of value. The forms are human and mouse.
Form relates various people to a form ( called the form ).
True form relates various people to a form ( called the true form ).
The verb to appear as means the form relation.
The verb to be truly means the true form relation.
Alice is a woman.
She is in your place.
She is truly a mouse.
She appears as a human.
Carol is a woman.
She is in your place.
She is truly human.
She appears as a mouse.
Instead of examining something,
say “[if the noun is truly human]Definitely a human.[otherwise]not so sure.”
I can work around it in this case by saying [if the true form of the noun is human], but I’m trying to avoid the more verbose statement.
I tried creating a condition with decide if (p - a person) is truly (f - a form):, but inform wouldn’t compile it because is truly overlaps with the verb I already defined. So it feels like it should be working as I expected already.
So even with your workaround, something funky is going on here. Check the “Meet Market” example in WWI 13.13 and compare to yours. I’m not sure I see the difference.
I’m not sure what’s going on under the hood, but Inform seems to get confused by the parenthetical “(called the form)”, probably because it’s also the name of the kind of value.
If you change the parenthetical to “(called the apparent form)”, for example, then the runtime problem will be gone.
Additionally, for better readability, I’d probably change the relation’s name to something other than “Form”, for example “Appearance”, so: “Appearance relates various people to a form (called the apparent form).”
