On Jul 4, 2006, at 2:04 AM, Kelketek Titikilik Rritaa wrote:
> Mountains(#216RJ) Owner: Keketal_Kotaru Parent: Room Zero(#0R)
> Type: ROOM Flags: JUMP_OK
> DESC: You are in a forested mountain area. Up ahead, you can see
> evidence of a village. Lower down is more mountains. A good distance
> into the west, you can see a river. The mountain air here is
> pleasently
> cool, and the smells of trees please your senses.
> Key: *UNLOCKED*
> Chown_OK Key: *UNLOCKED*
> Container Key: *UNLOCKED*
> Force Key: *UNLOCKED*
> Success: @$ObvExits
Do you have a $ObvExits program installed on your MUCK? If you
don't, I can see this @succ message causing a problem. ZoLook tries
to match it to an executable MUF, doesn't find one, so it produces
the error message instead.
> dir /_/:
> str /_showactions?:yes
> 2 properties listed.
The properties we are interested in can be found in the "_"
directory. Thus:
ex here=_/**
You should find one "/_/sc:@$ObvExits" that is causing the trouble.
> Also, I should note that it doesn't give you that error when you
> enter a
> room, just when you look at it after having entered.
That's. . . odd. Maybe it's using the internal LOOK command when you
enter a room. Probably you don't have your global LOOK action named
with all the possible abbreviations, including the one the MUCK uses
to trigger a LOOK when somebody enters a room. The name of the
action in room #0 should be "look;loo;lo;l;lookat".
It would appear that ProtoMUCK's in-built LOOK command simply ignores
MUF calls it can't match, rather than producing an error message.
Hey guys! I'm new here. I don't know much about MUF or MPI, but I do have technical knowledge and I'm good at toying with stuff until it works, so I've got a...
... This should only happen when ZoLook finds a description string that begins with the "@" character. It assumes this indicates a MUF that is to be executed...
Mountains(#216RJ) Owner: Keketal_Kotaru Parent: Room Zero(#0R) Type: ROOM Flags: JUMP_OK DESC: You are in a forested mountain area. Up ahead, you can see ...
... Do you have a $ObvExits program installed on your MUCK? If you don't, I can see this @succ message causing a problem. ZoLook tries to match it to an...
No, it seems I don't have that installed... Additionally, I'm not seeing the obvious exits anymore.. Maybe I just thought I saw them earlier. I've been...
Found it, registered it. Now I've got this: The Starting Room(#100RA) This is the starting room. It is a nice comfortable room existing to give players a...
... There are some look programs with obvious exits support built-in, so if you've been switching MUFs around that may be what you saw. ... Not sure what the...
Compiling... Please make sure this program is registered as: $muf/zolook Error in line 53: I don't understand what object you want to $include. Compiler done. ...
... Oh! Aha! I had completely forgotten about that. That's a reference to object_match.muf, which I coded as a means of working around some major bugs in...
My compiler doesn't know .samestring? . Is that a macro, and if so, what is the definition said macro? It seems to be important to the compiling. And if that...
... def samestring? stringcmp not It's only a convenience macro, makes code slightly more readable. ... Each MUCK tends to accumulate its own ecology of macros...
Compiling... Please regiester this program as $matchpatch Error in line 26: Unrecognized word TRUE. Compiler done. 26: TRUE exit It seems my MUCK subscribes...
This happens when I try to show the room: cmd-editroom(#222), line 2035; CALL: invalid object. System stack backtrace: 1) cmd-editroom(#222) line 2036, in...
... Maybe cmd-editroom needs higher permissions, what do you have it set to? Or maybe you need to set a LINK_OK flag on your look and lsedit programs? If you...
... So, your global "look" command is #293. . . ... Your copy of ZoLook is #206. . . ... And. . . $def/safecall is also #206? That can't be right, ZoLook ...
You're comments were most helpful in finding the problem! You see, at one point or another I screwed something up when defing safecall, because safecall is...