From b110c6d86c64446ca2eea6c8328fc5759846865c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Graham Nelson Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 23:58:12 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Fix for Mantis bug 1912 --- .../_Results_Ideal/PM_CantUncreate.txt | 23 ++++++++++--------- .../assertions-module/Chapter 4/Assertions.w | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/inform7/Tests/Test Problems/_Results_Ideal/PM_CantUncreate.txt b/inform7/Tests/Test Problems/_Results_Ideal/PM_CantUncreate.txt index 75f442f64..6ed0b55ec 100644 --- a/inform7/Tests/Test Problems/_Results_Ideal/PM_CantUncreate.txt +++ b/inform7/Tests/Test Problems/_Results_Ideal/PM_CantUncreate.txt @@ -1,15 +1,16 @@ -Inform 7 build 6L26 has started. +Inform 7 v10.1.0 has started. I've now read your source text, which is 64 words long. -I've also read Standard Rules by Graham Nelson, which is 42597 words long. -I've also read English Language by Graham Nelson, which is 2288 words long. +I've also read Basic Inform by Graham Nelson, which is 7691 words long. +I've also read English Language by Graham Nelson, which is 2328 words long. +I've also read Standard Rules by Graham Nelson, which is 32092 words long. Problem__ PM_CantUncreate >--> In order to act on 'The winch switch states are lock, free, reel in, run out' (source text, line 3), I seem to need to give a new meaning to 'lock', - something which was created by the earlier sentence 'The lock is scenery in - the Service Area' (source text, line 2). That must be wrong somehow: I'm - guessing that there is an accidental clash of names. This sometimes happens - when adjectives are being made after objects whose names include them: for - instance, defining 'big' as an adjective after having already made a 'big - top'. The simplest way to avoid this is to define the adjectives in - question first. -Inform 7 has finished: 17 centiseconds used. + which currently means something created by the earlier sentence 'The lock + is scenery in the Service Area' (source text, line 2). That must be wrong, + so I'm guessing that there is an accidental clash of names. This sometimes + happens when adjectives are being made after objects whose names include + them: for instance, defining 'big' as an adjective after having already + made a 'big top'. The simplest way to avoid this is to define the + adjectives in question first. +Inform 7 has finished. diff --git a/inform7/assertions-module/Chapter 4/Assertions.w b/inform7/assertions-module/Chapter 4/Assertions.w index 6c11391c7..23cec7a87 100644 --- a/inform7/assertions-module/Chapter 4/Assertions.w +++ b/inform7/assertions-module/Chapter 4/Assertions.w @@ -1883,8 +1883,8 @@ void Assertions::issue_value_equation_problem(parse_node *px, parse_node *py) { StandardProblems::handmade_problem(Task::syntax_tree(), _p_(PM_CantUncreate)); Problems::issue_problem_segment( "In order to act on %2, I seem to need to give " - "a new meaning to '%1', something which was created by the earlier " - "sentence %3. That must be wrong somehow: I'm guessing that there " + "a new meaning to '%1', which currently means something created by the " + "earlier sentence %3. That must be wrong, so I'm guessing that there " "is an accidental clash of names. This sometimes happens when " "adjectives are being made after objects whose names include them: " "for instance, defining 'big' as an adjective after having already "