Very nice, I agree with CDI on that.

I forgot all about being able to do that in matrices, thanks for the reminder.

Bump

I have thought on this some, and I am curious on an experts opinion. Would having movement be the main loop, possibly enemy movement (if I add some) all that is in the main loop, and have all the extras, such as the events, attacks, etc.. outside of it so that it doesn't go through all the conditionals. My only problem about just doing that is needing a Goto, I think, unless 2 while loops inside of one, like this:


Code:


Would that work?

What's wrong with:


Code:

The fact there are going to be quite a few weapons in all, I am hoping for about 6 at the most, if all goes well, and those are all key-dependent, along with the movement, just having 2 weapons slows it down quite a bit.

So you're saying not much of it could go in the key-independent section?

The only things that will be key-independent is the map rendering and determining what weapons and items you have.

That's perfect! Then your non-keypress section will be small, and that top/inner loop will be nice and tight!

What I decided to try and do is separate the attacking and movement into 2 loops, one is activated if a certain button is pressed. The issue is I need at least 1 weapon usable while jumping, probably the sword right now as it is the smallest in number of commands and conditionals right now.

Is there a way to check if you X,Y coordinates are within 2 and 7 for X for 2 and 15 for Y with one condition, so it is like X>1 and X<15 but with lets say a max() in the conditional?

I guess I could add a bit more to this also, what if I the want to see if the location on the matrix in a certain direction is a 0, >6, <10, or 12 without using a massive number of conditions in one If statement?

Regarding part 1:
Code:
Which is the same as
Code:
I use this code to generate that (It revolves around a math concept I could never remember):
Code:
Which will give you the statement for a one part conditional: A<High And A>Low. Hope that helps.

For the second part, you'd have to ask a certain Weregoose to shorten that, I would just do the individual parts, because it will be faster than doing insane math.

You're going to have to elaborate more on that, plus I think you made some errors that make it unworkable.

Simplifying _player1537's part-one gives 6>abs(2X-9, which is the same size as the original, but I'm not sure that it's faster.

And another rendition of his generating code would be: .5abs({A-B,A+B

A couple questions on that:
1. How would it be unworkable?
2. How could I elaborate even more? If the coordinate you are looking at is a 0, between 6 and 10 (>6 and <10), or a 12, then the condition will be true.

Does that bit help?

The implicit OR between ">6, <10" from your last post did it in.

What is the possible range for the coordinate?

I am using a matrix for a map(whats new :p). So it is 8x16, and the possible numbers in it I am planning on having 0-20 hopefully tops, I shouldn't need to add anymore then that.

not(fPart(838383/(10X-83

Just go with it.

I am going with it, but it really is a big number and an not(fPart()) :p