Discontinuing a verb when a proc returns false

ID:272720
 
Dec 26 2008, 11:35 am
I want to use a proc as a "check", if you will, so that if it returns false, a verb will discontinue with the rest of its coding, much like a return.
Dec 26 2008, 11:42 am
Simple..

proc/Check()
   if(prob(60)) return TRUE
   // procs return false by default

mob/verb/Doodly_doodly_doo() // <_<
   world << "Will it be possible ? Will the world be saved from total domination ?!"
   if(!Check()) return
   world << "Success!"


You just need to check if the value the proc returns is true or false.
Dec 26 2008, 11:52 am
In response to Andre-g1
I figured as much. Now for the other issue that made me unsure...

world
    mob = /mob/Player

mob/Player/var
    tmp/isAway = FALSE

mob/proc/failCheck()
    if(src.isAway)
        return 0

mob/verb
    Test()
        if(failCheck()) return
        usr<<"This is not supposed to be displayed"


General Procs.dm:29:error:src.isAway:undefined var

I know it has to do with the fact that I made the players' typepath to /mob/Player, but I don't know how to make it so the procs and verbs read it like that too.
Dec 26 2008, 11:57 am
In response to Mizukouken Ketsu
-First change your failCheck() proc, so it's under mob/Player.

--Secondly, reading my post would be nice. A proc returns false by default, so why'd you make it return 0 ? 0 is considered a FALSE value. Also, if you're returning FALSE values, why are you checking if the return value of the proc is true ? Makes no sense at all.

Afterwards, since you're checking the src in the failCheck() you need to pass the mob onto the proc. So, if(failCheck()) should actually be if(!usr.failCheck()).
Dec 26 2008, 12:05 pm
In response to Andre-g1
 
mob/Stuff/verb
    Test()
        if(!failCheck()) return


Stuff.dm:20:error:failCheck:undefined proc
Dec 26 2008, 12:07 pm
In response to Mizukouken Ketsu
Read the bottom part of my post...
Dec 26 2008, 1:24 pm (Edited on Dec 26 2008, 1:34 pm)
In response to Andre-g1
Why do people like to assume I "didn't read all of my post". I did. Still didn't work. Said same exact thing. Help now, please?

EDIT
Nevermind, I figured it out.
Dec 26 2008, 1:58 pm
In response to Mizukouken Ketsu
Mizukouken Ketsu wrote:
Why do people like to assume I "didn't read all of my post".

Because you didn't use the way I told you to. I just tested with your snippet and it worked fine the way I told you.
Dec 26 2008, 2:32 pm
In response to Andre-g1
Well it didn't work for me, sorry. However, I did find a way for it to work. Thanks anyways.
Dec 26 2008, 3:14 pm
In response to Andre-g1
Andre-g1 wrote:
--Secondly, reading my post would be nice. A proc returns false by default, so why'd you make it return 0 ? 0 is considered a FALSE value. Also, if you're returning FALSE values, why are you checking if the return value of the proc is true ? Makes no sense at all.

It's done often to indicate, explicitly, that the proc needs to return false. This is contrasting using return simply to indicate the proc is halting.