Conner said:

Sorry, Kayle, I'm pretty much in the same boat over here. If I put it in, I've still got to try to test it somehow by my lonesome too. My mud's not exactly been crowded to capacity since my move to the country that mandated switching to this damn laggy satellite feed.

Yeah, neither of mine are open, and with work, I lack the time I used to have to thoroughly test things before posting them. I do have some active staff members though, I probably could have gotten them to test it. But Meh, that's hindsight for you.

Sharmair said:

Stuffs.

Thanks Sharmair.

It felt wrong to me as well to toss all those checks into move_char when the actual problem lies with auto-exits themselves not the actual movement of the character. I hadn't stopped to think about the fall through from the check being where I had it though, so that was another good catch on your part. I guess that's good enough confirmation for me that using a check_pos() call on the auto-exits is enough to fix this issue. So I'll see about getting an actual fix posted soon.

Aint hindsight wonderous?

So, does this address things like being pulled through an exit by room settings (See also help PULLTYPES) as well as flee, being dragged, etc now?

My/Sharmair's fix only affects auto-exits.

Applying the original fix will disrupt flee. I dunno about pulltypes, I would assume it would disrupt those as well though.

That's why I was uneasy about applying the fix to move_char, too many things use move_char that fixing it directly in there will break things other than fixing just the issue, if you apply a targeted fix, for instance, a check_pos() call in the interpret function in the section for auto-exits, you fix the issue, without breaking any other things.

Second (or 3rd now?) Kayle's logic. move_char() is a pretty big catch-all function for an awful lot of things. Fleeing being one, pulltypes another, and I'm sure there's probably other stuff that hasn't been noticed yet. Basically it would disrupt anything where the assumption is the move will happen regardless.

So fixing the problem in the auto-exit code looks like the better option.

So, does that mean we're adopting one of these proposed fixes as official then?

Yeah, I'll get it posted and released hopefully tomorrow after work.

Sounds good.