MantisBT - Core Inform
View Issue Details
0000461Core InformRules and rulebookspublic2010-12-10 09:572014-05-07 07:33
normalmildhave not tried
x86Mac OS X10.6
(cosmetic) Error message is badly worded
0000461: Value-parametrized rulebook declarations fail with unhelpful message when hyphen is included.
Value-parametrized rulebooks can be declared with or without a hyphen in this form:

Testing rules is an object based/object-based rulebook.

With additional options, however, as in the source provided, the hyphenated form fails with an unhelpful message.

The sentence 'Testing rules is an object-based rulebook producing a truth state' appears to say two things are the same - I am reading 'Testing rules' and 'object-based rulebook producing a truth state' as two different things, and therefore it makes no sense to say that one is the other: it would be like saying that 'St Peter is St Paul'. It would be all right if the second thing were the name of a kind, perhaps with properties: for instance 'Pearly Gates is a lighted room' says that something called Pearly Gates exists and that it is a 'room', which is a kind I know about, combined with a property called 'lighted' which I also know about.
Test is a room.

Testing rules is an object-based rulebook producing a truth state.
No tags attached.
Issue History
2010-12-10 09:57ektempleNew Issue
2010-12-10 16:08EmacsUserStatusnew => confirmed
2010-12-10 16:50mattweinerNote Added: 0000894
2014-03-08 12:17grahamNote Added: 0002533
2014-03-08 12:17grahamStatusconfirmed => resolved
2014-03-08 12:17grahamResolutionopen => fixed
2014-03-08 12:17grahamAssigned To => graham
2014-05-07 07:32jmcgrewFixed in Version => 6L02
2014-05-07 07:33jmcgrewStatusresolved => closed

2010-12-10 16:50   
On, Erik suggested that the solution would be to deprecate "object-based rulebook" entirely. I'd like to vote against that, if it's possible to implement it -- "object-based rulebook" is better grammatically, IMO, than "object based rulebook" (it's like the difference between "man eating shark" and "man-eating shark"), and I think it'd be a shame to fail to recognize it.

--I realize this is an incredibly trivial note, but my first real job mostly consisted of putting in those hyphens, so I find it hard to turn that off in my mind.
2014-03-08 12:17   
I mulled this over a while, but eventually decided it should just be legal syntax, as a concession to the past practice. It now is.