Is there a standard syntax for declaring a verb with a count, or is it a roll-your-own sort of thing, and if so what is the correct preposition format for the verbPhrase in the verb declaration?
As always, an example:
#charset "us-ascii"
#include <adv3.h>
#include <en_us.h>
DefineTAction(Stack);
VerbRule(Stack) 'stack' dobjList : StackAction
verbPhrase = 'stack/stacking (what)'
;
modify Thing
dobjFor(Stack) {
verify() {
illogical('{You/he} can\'t stack {that dobj/him}. ');
}
}
;
DefineLiteralTAction(StackNum, DirectObject);
VerbRule(StackNum) 'stack' singleLiteral dobjList : StackNumAction
verbPhrase = 'stack/stacking (count) (what)'
;
modify Thing
stackCount = nil
dobjFor(StackNum) {
verify() {
illogical('{You/he} can\'t stack {that dobj/him}. ');
}
action() {
if(!rexMatch('(<digit>+)$', gLiteral)) {
"<q><<gLiteral>></q> isn't a valid number. ";
exit;
}
self.stackCount = toInteger(gLiteral);
}
}
;
startRoom: Room 'Featureless Void'
"This is a room, more or less. "
;
+ pebble: Thing 'round pebble*pebbles' 'pebble'
"It's a round pebble. "
isEquivalent = true
dobjFor(Stack) {
verify() { illogical('How many do you want to stack?'); }
}
dobjFor(StackNum) {
verify() {}
action() {
inherited();
"We should really check to see if you have
<<spellInt(self.stackCount)>> handy, but we don't. ";
}
}
;
+ brick: Thing 'red brick*bricks' 'brick'
"It's a standard red brick. "
isEquivalent = true
dobjFor(Stack) {
verify() {}
action() {
"This isn't actually an action although it looks
very much like one. ";
}
}
dobjFor(StackNum) {
verify() {
illogical('You can\'t stack more than one at a time. ');
}
}
;
+ blob: Thing 'unstackable blob*blobs' 'blob'
"It's an unstackable blob. "
isEquivalent = true
;
me: Actor
location = startRoom
;
versionInfo: GameID
name = 'sample'
byline = 'nobody'
authorEmail = 'nobody <foo@bar.com>'
desc = '[This space intentionally left blank]'
version = '1.0'
IFID = '12345'
;
gameMain: GameMainDef
initialPlayerChar = me
;
This creates two new “stack” verbs, Stack which just takes a dobj and StackNum that takes a literal and a dobj. There are also two kinds of Thing: pebbles, which must be stacked with a count, and bricks, which must be stacked individually.
The code works, mostly:
>stack brick
This isn't actually an action although it looks very much like one.
>stack 2 bricks
You can't stack more than one at a time.
>stack pebble
How many do you want to stack?
>stack 2 pebbles
We should really check to see if you have two handy, but we don't.
>stack x bricks
"x" isn't a valid number.
…covers all of the basic behaviours I care about.
My first problem/question is when the parser gives a disambiguation prompt:
>stack
Count do you want to stack?
This is clearly because of the format of verbPhrase in the StackNum VerbRule:
verbPhrase = 'stack/stacking (count) (what)'
But if there’s a guide to prepositions (beyond what’s mentioned in passing in the Creating Verbs in TADS 3 documentation, I haven’t been able to locate it.
So that’s one question: what’s the correct preposition/format for declaring the VerbRule here.
Another question is: is this approach fundamentally off-base? That is, is there some more straightforward method of doing this (that is, specifying a verb that can or cannot take a count in different circumstances)?
I’d earlier posted a question about using CollectiveGroup to manage actions with counts, but now I’m looking at an alternate approach: instead of modelling the situation like a bag of equivalent objects (where the basic behaviour is controlled by the individual objects and a CollectiveGroup tries to figure out when to step in to treat them as a group), I’m now considering treating it more like a debit card with a balance (one object that holds a count, so it’s always just a single object and the verb handlers figure out if an action involving a count makes sense or not), if that makes sense.
Edit: Slightly edited sample code to include a blob object that takes the default behaviours for both verbs.