Post A Comment

User Comments:

Technomancer (Guest), September 1st, 2016, 7:16 am     Reply

JSON
And that's what happens when you try to cast a LockObject in JSON. Remember kids, JSON is a serialization format, but you need to assign values to variables.

G. (Guest), September 1st, 2016, 10:39 am     Reply


Well, it's a step up from dropping dead under pressure. (Stack overflow?)

burningtyger, September 1st, 2016, 11:04 pm     Reply


@G.: Is JSON notation normally color-sensitive? Otherwise the red and blue could be a nod to the ~ATH program and the Mobius Double Reacharound. Curio seems to have tapped into his death/decay powers anyway.

Technomancer (Guest), September 3rd, 2016, 4:17 pm     Reply

JSON addl.
Many programming languages can be colorized to improve readability. There's... definitely not enough here to assume a Homestuck reference.

As for JSON, it's not the only thing that allows assigning dictionaries. However, in any language, the assignment is wrong. Maybe that's why it melted? I propose:
World.set(door.knob[locked], False)
or
Let door.knob.locked = False

ArrN, September 3rd, 2016, 7:11 pm     Reply

I don't know much about computer programming...
...but maybe the reason Curio's spell melted the knob is because he changed the variables assigned to the knob and not those assigned to the lock?

burningtyger, September 3rd, 2016, 10:53 pm     Reply


@ArrN: He didn't change the variables assigned to the knob, he changed the variables assigned to the brass it was made of. By changing {matter: "brass", locked:y} to {matter: "brass", locked:n} he "unlocked" the brass from its solid form. At least, that's how I understand it.

Seth (Guest), September 4th, 2016, 1:32 am     Reply


This isn't JSON, but it could be JavaScript, and under the assumption that it is, I see a couple problems:
* door and ornate are unrelated objects. door.knob is set to "ornate", which is a string literal, not the ornate object, and so there's nothing connecting the two.
* y and n are never defined and are not keywords, so he effectively changed the value of ornate.locked from undefined to undefined, which shouldn't have done anything at all.

@burningtyger: That would explain the result, but it doesn't make sense to me. It would if locked were a property of ornate.matter, but locked and matter are both properties of ornate. If that is the explanation, I can't image what code would have had the intended effect.

burningtyger, September 12th, 2016, 6:31 pm     Reply


@Seth: Frankly I'm not that familiar with Javascript. Moros specialize in transitions, changes, so think of it as a change of state or phase. Curio tried to change the "lockedness" of the knob, redefining its parameters within the universe, but altered its "Solidity" instead. Does that make sense?

Seth (Guest), September 12th, 2016, 7:19 pm     Reply


@burningtyger: Yeah, like I said, that part makes sense. What I don't get is how it follows from the code, or, equivalently, how the code could be fixed.

burningtyger, September 12th, 2016, 8:30 pm     Reply


@Seth: I'd originally thought Curio might have essentially flipped a switch or gate from "on" to "off" - a simple binary operation- but altered the wrong property of the object. I think we agree, though, that somewhere between conception and execution the entire thing got messed up. GIGO.