04-09-2003, 05:59 AM
I had asked earlier about MAP$ in some syntax i saw...
It turns out to be a function, in the function it determines (Oh, yes, it is a -like game) whether the block that you are standing next to, or trying to move to, has the ability to be blown up (temporary), if anything can be done to it (permanent), or there is no block there whatsoever. The od that he used was a two-dimensional array that had P for permanent, where the permanent tiles were on the map, R for blocks that could be blown up, and a 0 for no block whatsoever. I was wondering if this is a safe way to do a 'Map Check' or if there is a better and safer way. Oh, and in this case, for each component of the array there is a corresponding 'tile' on the map.
Should I use a function such as the one mentioned previously or try a new one?
It turns out to be a function, in the function it determines (Oh, yes, it is a -like game) whether the block that you are standing next to, or trying to move to, has the ability to be blown up (temporary), if anything can be done to it (permanent), or there is no block there whatsoever. The od that he used was a two-dimensional array that had P for permanent, where the permanent tiles were on the map, R for blocks that could be blown up, and a 0 for no block whatsoever. I was wondering if this is a safe way to do a 'Map Check' or if there is a better and safer way. Oh, and in this case, for each component of the array there is a corresponding 'tile' on the map.
Should I use a function such as the one mentioned previously or try a new one?
isconception and deceit is the only way...
'An enemy of my enemy is my friend...'
'The only way to truly know a man, is to fight him...'
--The Matrix Reloaded--
'An enemy of my enemy is my friend...'
'The only way to truly know a man, is to fight him...'
--The Matrix Reloaded--