OO and game design questions

Dave Angel davea at ieee.org
Tue Oct 19 13:37:04 CEST 2010


  On 2:59 PM, dex wrote:
>> I'm not sure if it's a good idea to let an item disappear from your
>> inventory by a weak reference disappearing.  It seems a little shaky
>> to not know where your objects are being referenced, but that's yout
>> decision.
> OK, imagine a MUD, where players can "dig out" new rooms. Room A has a
> door that holds reference to newly created room B. By "using" a door,
> player is transported to room B. At later time someone destroys room
> B.
>
> Using strong references, I have to remove room B from list of rooms,
> and also remove door to room B, as it holds reference to room B. To do
> that, I have to keep list of doors that lead to room B.
>
> Using weak references, I don't have to worry about removing all doors
> to room B. They all now have a dead reference, which better models
> actual situation. If part of mine collapses, or if a module on space
> station is destroyed, the passage to that location does not magically
> vanish - it's just obstructed.
>
> Can you please tell me if there's something wrong with my reasoning?
>
Simply replace room B with a "destroyed room" object.  That can be quite 
small, and you only need one, regardless of how many rooms are thus 
eliminated.

DaveA



More information about the Python-list mailing list