Re: Not understanding eval traceback (Seconded)

• Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 09:30:29 PDT
• From:
  Saint Erroneous <mpv@st-andrews.ac.uk>
• cc: moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
• Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
• In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960511155227.0068375c@pop.kaiwan.com>

On Sat, 11 May 1996 slayer@kaiwan.com wrote:
> At 08:40 AM 5/11/96 PDT, Saint Erroneous wrote:
> >On Sat, 11 May 1996, Geoffrey King wrote:

> >> In case you're dubious, here is the entire train of events:
> >> Entered the following:
> >>   @verb me:r6 this none this
> >>   @edit me:r6
> >>   "return 6;
> >>   compile
> >>   quit
> >>   eval caller:r6()

> >> Got back:
> >>   wizard>> eval caller:r6()
> >>   #-1:Input to EVAL, line 1:  Verb not found
> >>   ... called from built-in function eval()
> >>   ... called from #57:eval_cmd_string (this == #2), line 18
> >>   ... called from #57:eval*-d (this == #2), line 10
> >>   (End of traceback)

> >You forgot to set the verb to be +x, so eval won't be able to find it.

> hm I thought when you made a verb 'this none this' and didn't specify the
> permissions it made it 'rxd' by default?

Quite correct. That'll teach me to think I know what I'm doing. *duaha*

Does it give the same traceback if you call the verb as
"eval player:r6()" instead? 

-michael

• Re: Not understanding eval traceback (Seconded)
• From: slayer@kaiwan.com

• Prev: Re: Not understanding eval traceback (Seconded)
• Next: Re: Not understanding eval traceback (Seconded)
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows