Referring to condition properties in a definitions table

Authoring Inform 7
1

I love defining kinds of value in a table. But I’m not sure if I can define all the properties I want here. How can I add the “repeatable” condition to this table?

[code]A turn-based event is a kind of value. Some turn-based events are defined by the Table of Turn-based Events.
A turn-based event has a stored action called the scheduled action. The scheduled action of a turn-based event is usually the action of waiting.
A turn-based event has a turn-based event called the next move. The next move of a turn-based event is usually normal keyboard input.

A turn-based event can be repeatable. A turn-based event has a number called the maximum repeats. The maximum repeats of a turn-based event is usually 100. A turn-based event can be uneventful.

Table of Turn-based Events
turn-based event scheduled action (stored action) maximum repeats (number)
normal keyboard input – --

Test is a room.

When play begins:
repeat with E running through turn-based events:
showme the maximum repeats of E;
showme whether or not E is repeatable;[/code]

Everything I’ve tried gives a compiler error.

Also, I thought leaving a table cell blank would give it the kind’s default value - apparently it doesn’t because the maximum repeats is 0. Is there any way to specify in the table that we want to use the default value?

2

Now I have a new, even weirder problem. It doesn’t happen in this example, but when I add it to my Kerkerkruip Automated Tests (github.com/i7/kerkerkruip/blob/ … e/story.ni), I get three “*** Deep copy failed: types mismatch ***” errors at the start of the game. Removing the stored action column makes them go away. Any ideas about that one?

3

Regarding the first post, one workaround is to writeA turn-based event has a truth state called repeatable flag. Definition: a turn-based event (called X) is repeatable if the repeatable flag of X is true.

It does, but the number kind’s default is zero—the usually line doesn’t come into play. I don’t think there’s a workaround for this one.

4

You can define “repeatability” as a kind of value (repeatable and unrepeatable), then add a column with the name repeatability. That tells the compiler to use the state of that value as a property.

The only advantage this has over eu’s code is the ability to write “now the X is repeatable”.