Hi!
So I was going to title this thread something like “Sorry for the vast amount of rudeness following!” as it’s all about something I noticed when trying to implement a “piss off” action in my WIP (so there was a lot of piss off this and piss off that!) but I found an alternative example to ilustrate the same issue (if it’s an issue at all!)
Imagine I’m trying to code a “cheer up” action in my Beta thing, something that would certainly have an effect on people, but not on things. Something like this:
[code]
Location_01 is a room. “You’re in Location_01.”.
A book is a thing in location_01
Rose is a woman in Location_01.
Cheering up is an action applying to one thing.
Understand “cheer [someone]” as cheering up.
Understand “cheer [someone] up” as cheering up.
Understand “cheer up [someone]” as cheering up.
Report cheering up: say “‘Hey, hey, hey! It’s cheering up time!’ you say, while [noun] stares at you with amazement.”
test me with “cheer/cheer up/cheer rose/cheer rose up/cheer up rose/cheer book/cheer book up/cheer up book”.[/code]
The test outputs this:
I expected [8] to be the same that [6] and [7], but that was not the case!
I took a look into cheer grammar lines in auto.inf. As expected, they were just like this:
Verb 'cheer'
* creature -> A80_cheering_up
* creature 'up' -> A80_cheering_up
* 'up' creature -> A80_cheering_up
I tried doing the same in a plain Inform 6 project and “cheer up book” gave the expected response requiring an animate object (and not claiming the book was not in sight)
I’m aware that I could easily work it out creating a check rule of my own instead of just trusting the “someone” tokens to do the job. What I would like to know is whether that [8] output in the first test is right or perhaps something is not working as it should.
