Bug: The max loop limit can no longer be avoided serverside with a sleep.

[Devil_Lord2]

Originally Posted by Skyld

Well, player.level is an object which represents the level, so player.level.name gets the name attribute of the level object. The name attribute is already a string, so it does not result in the object being coerced (the example I posted above shows why relying on object-to-string coercion is a really bad idea).

So ".level" isn't suppose to be a string for level, or it needs to convert it to a string while if I just add ".level.name" it saves it stress from doing it itself?

Originally Posted by ffcmike

Perhaps a good example would be the 'player' object. Within your script you're using player.account, 'player' being an object which can have variables written to and functions invoked on it, '.account' being a string/text value. If you can recognise that it is correct to use player.account instead of just 'player', you should also recognise it as correct to use level.name instead of just 'level'.

My problem is that if I don't use .account it will not work.. for whatever I might be trying to do, yet on level it does.. which is why I don't understand...

It is like some people saying why not keep some scripts GS1 for some parts if those parts still work and don't necessarily need to be fixed. I think that is a good metaphor?

[Skyld]

Originally Posted by Devil_Lord2

So ".level" isn't suppose to be a string for level, or it needs to convert it to a string while if I just add ".level.name" it saves it stress from doing it itself?

In crude terms, yes. You should not expect that coercing an object to a string actually does what you think, so don't rely on it just because it "sometimes works".

[Devil_Lord2]

Originally Posted by Skyld

In crude terms, yes. You should not expect that coercing an object to a string actually does what you think, so don't rely on it just because it "sometimes works".

Well, with all that stated, I'll definitely try to remember to correct these and future level.name checks. :]

Thank you both, much appreciated.