[DGD]Melville Mudlib

[Felix A. Croes]

Par Winzell <zell at skotos.net> wrote:

>[...]
> Phew. Then, finally, there is the virtual world itself. We separate the
> world objects from things like command parsing and text generation much
> more than does e.g. 2.4.5; this helps the world state to be independent
> of client interface, as discussed above. We just took a step further in
> this direction and utterly slew the time-honoured sub-classing approach
> to physical objects. There is now only the ur-thing, and it can be room
> or sword or bag of gold -- or all three -- depending only on its state.
> Thus everything is really a clone of /base/obj/thing, everything can be
> eaten (possibly with great discomfort) or used as a weapon (possibly a
> very bad weapon). Of couse, that effect is equally possible to achieve
> with traditional sub-classing. The difference is again the trend toward
> the data-driven, which seems to happen naturally around persistence.

This is interesting.  It allows for things like easy transmutation
of objects.  But I'm wondering how the actual code is structured.
Is inheritance used for the actual code that defines the behaviour
of /base/obj/thing in its various state permutations?

Regards,
Dworkin


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