View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0000218LDMudEfunspublic2004-11-26 23:16
ReporterlarsAssigned To 
Status newResolutionopen 
Summary0000218: Modify efun command_stack()
DescriptionShort: Extension to command_stack()
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:39:23 -0700
From: Lars Duening <>
Type: Feature
State: New

On 29 Feb 00, at 11:21, Casey Zacek wrote:

> Regarding the command_stack() additions I suggested, one of my Arches
> came up with this:
> oh and I realized that if command_stack() returned the object
> calling command(), that'd almost certainly solve our problems
> cuz we can test that against the command_giver element of the
> corresponding stack item and if they match up, then the object
> is forcing itself and its okay to let it through the only
> problem is that i envisioned the offending object element to
> return 0 if command() wasn't used that might not work because
> what if the offending object got dested then it'd still be
> "insecure" or whatever, but 0 would be in there you'd need to
> come up with some other value for a "secure" command

How about the object name instead of the object itself?
TagsNo tags attached.
External Data (URL)


There are no notes attached to this issue.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2004-11-26 23:16 lars New Issue