How to check which item is in alcove?

[Emciel]

the problem is when checking containedItems, the function basically fails if there's nothing there.
this works:

Code: Select all

function gemCheckblue()
   if alcoveblue:getItemCount() ~= 0 then
   for i in alcoveblue:containedItems() do
      if i.name == "blue_gem" then
		doorblue:open()
	  end
	end
	else
		 doorblue:close()
	end
end

[Komag]

AH YES! It works. I in fact had tried to add some version of "getItemCount() ~= 0" or "~= 1", but I had put it within the "for i" instead of around it, thanks

[Grimwold]

the problem is when checking containedItems, the function basically fails if there's nothing there.
this works:

Code: Select all

function gemCheckblue()
   if alcoveblue:getItemCount() ~= 0 then
   for i in alcoveblue:containedItems() do
      if i.name == "blue_gem" then
		doorblue:open()
	  end
	end
	else
		 doorblue:close()
	end
end

I'm having problems with this script... I want to use an empty flask instead of a blue gem, so I changed the i.name field to "flask" and made sure my alcove and door were named correctly as per the script. and if I have something else on the alcove with the flask (e.g. a blue gem), I can take the flask off and the door stays open. I ticked "activate always" on the alcove and used an "any" connection to the script.

I couldn't reproduce with the gem because it seems impossible to take that off the alcove when other things are there (it gets hidden!)

[Grimwold]

OK, this script works for my flask... if the flask is on the alcove, the door is open and if it is off, the door is closed... even when there are multiple items on the alcove, and when there are no items at all. The "break" is used to stop checking items once the flask is found.. otherwise the door would sometimes close with multiple items on the alcove including the flask.

Code: Select all

    function gemCheckblue()
       if alcoveblue:getItemCount() == 0 
       then
           doorblue:close()
       else
         for i in alcoveblue:containedItems() do
           if i.name == "flask" 
           then
             doorblue:open()
             break
           else
             doorblue:close()
           end
         end
       end
    end

[Komag]

Ah, that looks like a stronger more versatile alternative, thanks!

[Montis]

OK, this script works for my flask... if the flask is on the alcove, the door is open and if it is off, the door is closed... even when there are multiple items on the alcove, and when there are no items at all. The "break" is used to stop checking items once the flask is found.. otherwise the door would sometimes close with multiple items on the alcove including the flask.

Code: Select all

    function gemCheckblue()
       if alcoveblue:getItemCount() == 0 
       then
           doorblue:close()
       else
         for i in alcoveblue:containedItems() do
           if i.name == "flask" 
           then
             doorblue:open()
             break
           else
             doorblue:close()
           end
         end
       end
    end

I would replace the break with a return and place the doorblue:close() after the for-loop. Then the door wouldn't get x "closes" before it get's an "open", depending on how many items are in the alcove.

[Komag]

I partially follow, but can you write the script? I'm not quite sure how to "place the doorblue:close() after the for-loop" but still have everything work as intended

[Komag]

Hmm, you mean like this?:

Code: Select all

function gemCheckblue()
   if alcoveblue:getItemCount() == 0
   then
      doorblue:close()
   else
      for i in alcoveblue:containedItems() do
         if i.name == "flask"
         then
            doorblue:open()
            return
         end
      end
      doorblue:close()
   end
end

It seems to work well. So it looks for the flask. If it can't find it, then the for-loop closes and the door is closed. But if it finds it, it does the "return", which does what exactly? Just stops doing the script? How is it different from "break"? (does "break" only stop the for-loop?)

[SpacialKatana]

I'd assume so....(at least in C+) break drops you from loops, and return, well we know what that does. So, yeah.

[antti]

Yeah. Break stops the for-loop and return will stop the function.