[DGD]parse_string

[Felix A. Croes]

"Erlend M. Simonsen" <erlends at fairplay.no> wrote:

> "Felix A. Croes" <felix at dworkin.nl> writes:
>
> > The most useful and versatile solution is probably 2).  It can be
> > done by adding several intermediate object finding rules:
> > 
> >     object_in_carried_container: object ?	find_in_container
> >     object_in_room: object ?			find_in_room
> >     object_in_living: object ?			find_in_living
>
> I have added an object_in_container rule, and the sentence I try and
> match look a something like this:
> get OBJC from OBJ
>
> The problem is that when the find_in_container() is called, nothing is
> passed to the function describing which container to look for the
> object in, only information about the object to find.  So, if I have
> two conainers in the room, both holding a stone, how do I know which
> of the two containers to get the stone from?

Do whatever MudOS does?  This is not a parsing problem...


>[...]
> > I don't fully understand the problem as you described it, but my
> > guess is that the solution I gave above will work here too: add
> > intermediate rules that differ only in the LPC function called.
>
> I was a bit tired when I wrote this, so it might not have been 100%
> clear. I'll try and clarify.
>
> I have one big grammar containing all the rules and sentences for all
> the verbs I have defined. Based on the matched sentence, I want to
> call can_* and do_* functions to check that what the player is trying
> to do is possible.
>
> Since I don't know which sentence is matched, I try look at each
> element in the result of parse_string() and generate a part of the
> function name based on the type of each elelment. If the element is an 
> object, I add an 'obj' part. If it is a monster of player, I add a
> 'liv' part. If it is a string, I add the string.
>
> This means I get a function looking like this:
>
> can_get_obj_from_obj()
>
> But, this also means that I get a function looking like this when I
> have a STR part in the sentence:
>
> can_buy_beer_from_liv() and can_look_statue()
>
> instead of
>
> can_buy_str_from_liv() and can_look_str().
>
> If I change it so that a string in the result adds 'str' and not the
> string, I end up with
>
> can_buy_str_str_liv() 
>
> which in my opinion isn't exactly the desired result.
>
> So, my question is how can I find out which sentence was matched so
> that I can generate the correct functions( can_buy_str_from_liv)? Is
> this possible at all? Or do I have to take a different approach to my
> grammar and split it up, so that I have one grammar for each verb
> rule, and not only one grammar containing everything?

If I recall correctly, the MudOS parser allows you to add rules like
this:

    buy STR from LIV

What you should do is treat 'from' as a special word, rather than
a STR.  That way, you can distinguish between both cases when
generating your function name.

You shouldn't have to split up your grammar, though doing so may
make your approach more modular and easier to understand.

Regards,
Dworkin

List config page:  http://list.imaginary.com/mailman/listinfo/dgd