MOO-cows Mailing List Archive


Re: Use for $call_verb

--- Nick Ingolia wrote:
It would certainly be a step in an object-oriented direction, but it seems
like you are essentially asking for a way of kludging frobs in-db.  If the
example you provided was the primary use you had for this function,
"frobs" or other lightweight objects seem to be what you actually want; as
these are on our new maintainer's list, perhaps we will see something like
this.  As things stand now, however, I don't know that it would be a good
idea to add even more overhead to each function call...
--- end of quoted material ---

Actually, one of the things I was thinking of would be a way of making
"MOO-dependant" object numbers, eventually leading to a complete NFS-like
networking system, whereby you could walk seamlessly from one MOO to another. 
Basically, each object would actually be a 2-element list: {<object #>,
"context"} e.g. {#2, "LambdaMOO"}.  Then, $call_verb (or $bf_call_verb) would
catch any verb calls that had a context other than that MOO, and interpret them
as needed.  

Thus, if I were on DartMOOth, {#7165, "SchoolNetMOO}:tell("Hi") would call
$[bf_]call_verb({#7165, "SchoolNetMOO"}, "tell", {"Hi"}), which would check the
context, and pass the call over to SchoolNetMOO via some networking thingy. 
SchoolNetMOO would pick up the verb call, and tell me "hi".

chparents() could not work across MOOs, but 
For example, if Quinn's clothes had been ported, but given another object
number, a reference to {"$clothes", "LambdaMOO"} would be a reference to the
ported object (at least for chparent()s and the like).

This is a bit of a pipe dream right now, but it seems feasible.  It seems a lot
easier with call_verb implemented.  Otherwise, hacks to $bf_set_verb_code would
have to be used, and I don't particularly like that idea . . .

-manta (Your everyday source of Looney-Tune ideas)

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index