Pat Rankin wrote:
> I was about to also suggest that there
> be a rogue/non-rogue (with perhaps a third choice meaning "both")
> attribute. That way we could keep the rogue choices from being
> listed in the "symset" menu and the non-rogue choices from the
> "roguesymset" menu. Players who deliberately wanted to switch
> over would need to modify the attribute, possibly on a cloned set.
> Or perhaps they could just explicitly set their desired choices
> via NETHACKOPTIONS or .nethackrc and not use the 'O' menues--the
> new attribute doesn't necessary have to block which sets get used
> where, just filter menu entries to display the most applicable
> candidates.
Pat Rankin wrote:
> Symbol set definitions need a description attribute, above and
> beyond allowing comments in the file, for inclusion in the 'O'
> command's menu entries for selecting them.
[...]
> mapglyph.c isn't the proper place to decide whether to define
> ROGUE_COLOR. That may need to become a symbol attribute,
> which we'd then specify on the Epyx rogue set(s).
Implement both of the suggestions above.
A first cut at adding some user-level documentation to dat/symbols.
It should probably include a brief example (not verbose description) of
how to specify values in the various supported formats (decimal, octal,
hexadecimal, simple string, string including escape sequeces?). Perhaps
a pointer to the Guidebook too. :-}
This takes the PC config file commented symbol value
recommendations from <Someone> for blind players
and puts them into a symset.
[note to devteam: They look odd. I thought perhaps that
something was code wrong, but I went back to 3.4.3
and uncommented the config file stuff. They look the
same there, still odd, especially corridors.
Does anyone have any of the e-mail from <Someone> that might give an indication of what is supposed
to be seen on the display? I wonder if those config
file options fell out of synch with the code long ago]
