Your idea would work, but as a personal preference, I prefer to avoid having {if~} functions and variable assignments on every line just to fix a special case brought up by one line, even if this comes at the cost of creating a second group - especially when it's a laconic second group.
My way doubles the number of lines but saves on character count (and human readability of the main group). So... personal preference.
Your way is something I wouldn't have thought of, and I do thank you for bringing it to my attention as a possible alternative.
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@...
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/29/2023 9:11 AM, sdavies2720 via groups.io wrote:
First pass, I'd try something like this (there might be a syntax error or two in here):
;Start
1,|SkipCheck=0|[FooBar]
:FooBar
1,{If~%SkipCheck%!=1?foo stuff}|SkipCheck=1|
2-5,{If~%SkipCheck%!=2?bar stuff}|SkipCheck=2|
6-10,{If~%SkipCheck%!=3?other stuff}|SkipCheck=3|
...
100,[FooBar][FooBar]
This only checks for duplicate sequential rolls--if you're looking for something that can ignore any pattern of duplicate rolls, in a long series of rolls, setting a set of flags may end up more complicated than your approach.
_._,_._,_
------------------------------------------------------------------------
