|Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account||2018-09-21 20:34 PDT|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap|
|View Issue Details|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0000191||Core Inform||Understanding||public||2010-07-08 13:42||2010-10-28 00:31|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version||6F95|
|Summary||0000191: Inconsistent clarification for ambiguous noun references|
|Description||From WI 17.28:|
Clarifying the parser's choice of something
1. When it happens. When the player has typed an ambiguous noun reference, and Inform has made a decision about what was meant, and it matters what this decision is. (If the decision is between three identical gold coins, say, then it doesn't matter, and this activity does not take place.)
The example source creates three identical things, just as described. On the first drop command, they are all equivalent, so by the documentation there should be no clarification printed. Indeed there is not. On the second drop, the things differ by whether they are held or not, a factor that influences the parser's judgement because the Standard Rules say:
Understand "drop [things preferably held]" as dropping.
However, no command clarification is printed, suggesting that Inform has decided that it doesn't matter which thing is chosen. But on the third drop, a clarification is printed (with more objects, the clarification only occurs for the last one), even though the distinction being made---between things that are held and not held---is the same as on the previous turn.
Thus, either Inform is not behaving to specification or the documentation needs to be expanded to better explain ``it matters what this decision is.''
|Minimal Source Text To Reproduce|
There is a room. Three things are held by the player. Test me with "drop thing / g / g".
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|Effect||(serious/mild) Game compiles but misbehaves|
|What the parser should do in cases of ambiguity is so much a matter of personal taste that it's hard to call anything clearly right or wrong, but I've made a change here. The behaviour is now as the manual claims it is, i.e., clarification is not printed if the possibilities are indistinguishable. Previously it was that clarification was not printed if the object chosen was one of a set of several indistinguishable objects all in the same place, with a couple of provisos. This affected 9 of the 1543 test cases in the test suite, and the transcripts read better this way for 8 of them, so I've made the change.|
|2010-07-08 13:42||EmacsUser||New Issue|
|2010-07-08 13:47||jmcgrew||Status||new => acknowledged|
|2010-07-08 16:02||jmcgrew||Status||acknowledged => confirmed|
|2010-10-03 15:38||graham||Note Added: 0000664|
|2010-10-03 15:38||graham||Status||confirmed => resolved|
|2010-10-03 15:38||graham||Resolution||open => fixed|
|2010-10-03 15:38||graham||Assigned To||=> graham|
|2010-10-25 21:14||jmcgrew||Fixed in Version||=> 6F95|
|2010-10-28 00:31||jmcgrew||Status||resolved => closed|
|Copyright © 2000 - 2010 MantisBT Group|