Viewing Issue Simple Details Jump to Notes ] Wiki ] View Advanced ] Issue History ] Print ]
ID Category Severity Reproducibility Date Submitted Last Update
0006911 [DCSS] Bug Report minor sometimes 2013-04-13 04:00 2013-04-17 15:44
Reporter SamB View Status public  
Assigned To
Priority normal Resolution open  
Status new   Product Branch 0.13 ancient branch
Summary 0006911: G< sometimes avoids untried upstairs
Description I've noticed that, on *some* levels, typing "G<" to go up the nearest stairs doesn't work until I've tried those stairs already.

I suspect that this has to do with whether I used "G>" or just ">": it seems to work properly if I used ">", but not if I used "G>", to reach the level for the first time.

I'm pretty sure this bug has been around for a few major versions; I don't know why I didn't report it before...
Additional Information
Tags No tags attached.
Attached Files

- Relationships

-  Notes
(0022275)
crate (reporter)
2013-04-13 06:06

I don't feel like this is a bug. G always avoids unknown stairs when it's possible. This means that it is safe to use. Using G< or G> and using unknown stairs in place of known stairs makes it significantly less safe.
(0022311)
Cryptic (developer)
2013-04-17 15:08

I would agree that this is not a bug (although I initially came in here wanting to support the proposed change, crate makes an excellent point). Using the nearest stairs would (very frequently) break autotravel when using G.
(0022314)
Medar (developer)
2013-04-17 15:31

The bug report isn't about whether G< should or shouldn't take the unused stairs. It's about that behavior not being consistent. And that's definitely a bug.
(0022315)
neil (administrator)
2013-04-17 15:44

As I understand it, what is currently supposed to happen:

* Travelling to a particular point on a level uses known stairs only.
* Travelling to a distant floor uses only known stairs on the intermediate floors.
* Travelling to a level without specifying *where* on the level can use unknown stairs from the adjacent level. G< is supposed to fall into this case, but apparently is inconsistent about it.

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2013-04-13 04:00 SamB New Issue
2013-04-13 06:06 crate Note Added: 0022275
2013-04-17 15:08 Cryptic Note Added: 0022311
2013-04-17 15:31 Medar Note Added: 0022314
2013-04-17 15:31 Medar Issue Monitored: Medar
2013-04-17 15:44 neil Note Added: 0022315


Mantis 1.1.8[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2009 Mantis Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker