 |
gmueller
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 173
|
 Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 11:16 pm
multiplication not parsed properly
|
here is my pattern regex prompt stop further processing and case sensitive are the options:
| Code: |
| ^H:(\d+) M:(\d+) E:(\d+) W:(\d+) B:(\d+)% \[(c)?(s)?(p)?(d)?(b)?(a)?(f)?(@)? ?(-|e)(-|b)]$ |
the command is:
fails:
| Code: |
| peq_bal = 2(%14 == "e") + (%15 == "b") |
fails because there is no multiplication symbol
works ok:
| Code: |
| peq_bal = 2*(%14 == "e") + (%15 == "b") |
ps. this is why I'd really really really appreciate a bitshift operator. this fires a ton, because it's in my main prompt trigger.
if you could possibly make a left shift and a right shift operator I'd love you forever. |
|
|
|
|
Fang Xianfu
GURU
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 5155
Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 1:44 am
|
I don't think this is an error. You haven't told the parser what you want it to do with the result in your first example - why should it choose multiplication over concatenation or some other operation? It's simple enough to specify which operation you need.
|
|
|
|
|
gmueller
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 173
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 3:26 am
|
it is an error because the trigger fails to compile. and when the trigger is activated it says on the screen a bunch of error messages.
|
|
|
|
|
gmueller
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 173
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 3:27 am
|
if it would be treated as text at least the text would be stored in the variable, but nothing is stored in the variable... and the trigger is disabled so... ERROR
|
|
|
|
|
gmueller
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 173
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 3:30 am
|
if I wanted it treated as text I would have wrapped it in quotes, theres really no other interpretation, other than a multiply in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
hogarius
Adept
Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Posts: 221
Location: islands.genesismuds.org
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 11:30 am
|
| gmueller wrote: |
| if I wanted it treated as text I would have wrapped it in quotes, theres really no other interpretation, other than a multiply in this case. |
Just because it is your habit that a number followed by a number in parentheses is treated as multiplication, doesn't mean that the CMUD parser is written to treat it as multiplication.
I may be wrong on this, but I think most programming languages require a * sign to multiply two numbers. While 2(3) notation is acceptable to denote multiplication in mathematics, I'm not sure it's common practice in programming. And x(y) or x(5) notation in programming can denote an array element.
My feeling is if one wants to multiply, one should avoid ambiguity and use the single prescribed multiplication operator. |
|
|
|
|
gmueller
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 173
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 4:01 pm
|
I would say yes to this last comment because it is very logical, but it can be determined at compile time that 2 is a literal.
|
|
|
|
|
gmueller
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 173
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 4:14 pm
|
THIS LIST IS BY NO MEANS COMPLETE:
atom:
[(atom)]atom
atom[(atom)]
neg_or_pos_number
number
function
atom[binaryrelation] atom
[unitaryrelation]atom
binaryrelation:
+
-
*
/
unitaryrelation:
!
-
+
neg_or_pos_number:
[+/-]number
number:
[0-9]
[0-9][number]
function:
[@%]fname()
[@%]fname([number])
[@%]fname([function])
fname:
Alpha
Alpha[Alphanumber]
Alpha:
[a-zA-Z]Alpha
[a-zA-Z]
Alphanumber:
[a-zA-Z0-9]Alphanumber
[a-zA-Z0-9] |
|
Last edited by gmueller on Mon May 21, 2007 4:27 pm; edited 1 time in total |
 |
|
|
gmueller
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 173
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 4:24 pm
|
array element 5 would fall under @fname([number])
|
|
|
|
|
gmueller
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 173
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 6:25 pm
|
| hogarius wrote: |
| I may be wrong on this, but I think most programming languages require a * sign to multiply two numbers. |
untrue. but if it is the will of the gods that cmud behave this way, then that's just the way it is. :) |
|
|
|
|
Zugg
MASTER
Joined: 25 Sep 2000
Posts: 23379
Location: Colorado, USA
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 4:56 pm
|
Don't really want to get into a programming language debate, here, but: Pascal, C/C++, Java, JavaScript, PHP, Perl, VB...all of those languages use * for multiplication. I'm sure there are more, but those are the ones that I have personally used. And that pretty much covers the vast majority of programming languages that are in current use, both on the web and for desktop applications.
So, I'm not sure what other programming language you are used to that doesn't require it, but CMUD/zMUD *are* working the same as the majority of other programming languages, and this is not something that will change.
Functions for bit-shifting are on the wish-list for a future version of CMUD. |
|
|
|
|
Taz
GURU
Joined: 28 Sep 2000
Posts: 1395
Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 10:04 pm
|
He's probably in Uni using Haskell or ML or some other type of functional programming language.
|
|
_________________
Taz :) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
