not seeing the obvious

[mfrizzell]

I'm apparently not seeing the obvious. I've fiddled with this simple macro for a couple of hours staring at it and can't seem to see the issue. I'm getting errors in both if() roll options.

Code: Select all

<!-- General Damage -->
[h: Name = getProperty("Name")]
[h: Dead = getProperty("Dead")]
[h: HP = getProperty("HP")]
[h: TempHP = getProperty("TempHP")]
[h: Bloodied = getProperty("Bloodied")]
[h:Damage = DamageInflicted]
[H:TempHP = TempHP - Damage] 
[h:HP = HP + min(0, TempHP)]
[h:TempHP = max(0,TempHP)] 

[r: Name] takes [r:Damage] HP of damage<br>

[r, if(isPC()), code:
  { 
  [h, if(HP <= Bloodied): setState("Bloodied",1);setState("Bloodied",0)]
  [h, if(HP <= 0): setState("Dying",1);setState("Dying",0)]
  [h, if(HP <= 0): setState("Prone",1);setState("Prone",0)]
  [r: Name] has [r:HP] HP and [r:TempHP] temporary HP remaining.<br>
  [r, if(HP<= Dead), code:
    {
    [h: setState("Dead",1)]
	[h: setState("Dying",0)]
	};]
 };]
[h, if(isNPC()), code:
 {
  [h, if(HP <= Bloodied): setState("Bloodied",1);setState("Bloodied",0)]
  [h, if(HP <= 0): setState("Dead",1);setState("Dead",0)]
   [h, if(getState("Dead"), code:
     {
     [h: removeFromInitiative()]
     [h: id = getSelected()]
     [h: setLayer("Object",id)]
     };]
  };]

[H:bar.Damage = HP / MaxHP]

Another set of eyes would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks

[Rumble]

What error are you getting? The only thing I see on first glance is that you don't need the semicolons for if conditions that only have one branch - you can do:

Code: Select all

[r,if(condition),code:
{
    [x = 1d20]
}]

[CoveredInFish]

If you want to specifiy the else branch you have to add a code branch . even if its empty.

Code: Select all

[r,if(condition),code:
{
    [x = 1d20]
};{}]

[biodude]

Syntax error: your second nested IF() option is missing a closing bracket after the closing bracket from the function used as the condition. I do this all the time and started emulating other people's code formatting on the forums so I now compulsively add spaces around brackets and other delimiters to make them easy to see and count:

...

Code: Select all

...
[r, if( isPC() ), code:
  { 
  ...
  [r, if( HP<= Dead ), code:
    { <!--so far, so good -->
    ...
    }]<!-- either add an empty else case, or omit the semi-colon as Rumble & CIF have pointed out -->
 }]
[h, if( isNPC() ), code:
 {
  ... <!-- so far, so good -->
   [h, if( getState("Dead") ), code:
     {  <!-- oops.  added closing bracket to preceding IF() -->
     ...
     }]
  }]
...

[Raoden]

What error are you getting? The only thing I see on first glance is that you don't need the semicolons for if conditions that only have one branch - you can do:

Code: Select all

[r,if(condition),code:
{
    [x = 1d20]
}]

You can do that, but it will get you a useless quotation mark of output if the condition is not met.

If you want to specifiy the else branch you have to add a code branch . even if its empty.

No, I'm quite certain you can specify the "else" branch even without using [code:]. It may be true, though, that if you are using [code:] and the "else" branch is empty, you are still supposed to put empty braces {} there.

Syntax error: your second nested IF() option is missing a closing bracket after the closing bracket from the function used as the condition. I do this all the time and started emulating other people's code formatting on the forums so I now compulsively add spaces around brackets and other delimiters to make them easy to see and count:

Aha! I think biodude has your real issue pegged. And yeah, I do this all the time too.

[mfrizzell]

Syntax error: your second nested IF() option is missing a closing bracket after the closing bracket from the function used as the condition. I do this all the time and started emulating other people's code formatting on the forums so I now compulsively add spaces around brackets and other delimiters to make them easy to see and count:

...

Code: Select all

...
[r, if( isPC() ), code:
  { 
  ...
  [r, if( HP<= Dead ), code:
    { <!--so far, so good -->
    ...
    }]<!-- either add an empty else case, or omit the semi-colon as Rumble & CIF have pointed out -->
 }]
[h, if( isNPC() ), code:
 {
  ... <!-- so far, so good -->
   [h, if( getState("Dead") ), code:
     {  <!-- oops.  added closing bracket to preceding IF() -->
     ...
     }]
  }]
...

I'm not sure I follow, that looks like an open bracket to me. Thanks for the help.

[CoveredInFish]

If you want to specifiy the else branch you have to add a code branch . even if its empty.

No, I'm quite certain you can specify the "else" branch even without using [code:]. It may be true, though, that if you are using [code:] and the "else" branch is empty, you are still supposed to put empty braces {} there.

Agreed, but you got me wrong. I meant to say, what you formulated here better. Of course you can state an else case without using code at all. But if you want to use the else part and code together it must have brackets - even if they are empty.

[biodude]

I'm not sure I follow, that looks like an open bracket to me. Thanks for the help.

Before:

Code: Select all

   [h, if(getState("Dead"), code:
    {
    ...
   };]

After:

Code: Select all

   [h, if( getState( "Dead" ) ), code:
     {  <!-- oops.  added closing bracket to preceding IF() -->
     ...
     }]

The IF roll option was missing a second closing bracket after the getState("Dead") function call, to close the condition of the IF(). Without it, the code parser keeps looking in vain for the end of the condition and eventually craps out. (I can't highlight text within a code block, but I added space around the brackets to help them stand out more.

Hope that helps.

[Rumble]

Bracket = parenthesis. Biodude isn't referring to [ ] or { }, but the parentheses around the getState('Dead') call.

Took me a while to get what he meant because to me:

[ ] ==> Bracket
{ } ==> Brace
( ) ==> Parentheses


but that is apparently the American usage...?

[biodude]

Or, I'm an amateur programmer and not familiar with all the terms. I'm used to referring to "brackets" in text and sort of lump those many paired-symbols together. I like the terms Rumble has pointed and shall endeavor to use them.

Sorry for the confusion, and thanks for the clarification.

[Rumble]

Or, I'm an amateur programmer and not familiar with all the terms. I'm used to referring to "brackets" in text and sort of lump those many paired-symbols together. I like the terms Rumble has pointed and shall endeavor to use them.

Sorry for the confusion, and thanks for the clarification.

Before you do so, I may not be correct (they may be called brackets in programming, for instance). Wikipedia says that in America, bracket usually refers to [ ], while in the UK, generally they mean ( ).

[prestidigitator]

My understanding is the same as yours, Rumble. The full names I'm used to are:

[] - Square brackets
{} - Curly braces
<> - Angle brackets (when used in pairs to delimit things like vectors)
() - Parentheses

[biodude]

Before you do so, I may not be correct (they may be called brackets in programming, for instance). Wikipedia says that in America, bracket usually refers to [ ], while in the UK, generally they mean ( ).

Could be: I am from one of the Northern Colonies (Canada), so it could be a combination of UK conventions and lack of familiarity with programming conventions (which are likely based on US conventions).

Tomayto, Tomahto, and all that jazz. I like the precision of the names posted here, so I'm perfectly happy to use those in this context.

[Azhrei]

My understanding is the same as yours, Rumble. The full names I'm used to are:

[] - Square brackets
{} - Curly braces
<> - Angle brackets (when used in pairs to delimit things like vectors)
() - Parentheses

Heh-heh, semantics! My favorite topic!

Per U.S. usage (and hence, for programming languages that originated here) the term "brackets" means "[" and "]". Braces are the "{" and "}". And parens are the "(" and ")".

So "square brackets" and "curly braces" are redundant.

Ruby was developed in Japan so perhaps the terms they use might stick for that language? But what would they call them...?

My guess is that Mathemagician might agree (mathematics have definitions for this symbols as well; they match the programming terms AFAICR).

[Mathemagician]

They do indeed! I feel like sometimes I say curly bracket instead of brace, but that might just be me.