Thanks AndMetal. Unfortunately, without knowing what the structure is, its still not clear what is going on. There are only two possible answers. 1) its eating items, if stacked, or 2) its not storing them the same way as Perl does. I.e., Perl would see them like this:
$hash = (1224 => 2, 1234 => 1)
--internally: hash = table(2,2), where table(0,0) = 1224, table(0,1) = 2, etc.
If the server is doing this:
$item1 = 1224 => 2 --convert--> array(2), where array(0) = 1224, array(1) = 1224, etc.
Then.. It still shouldn't work, since your still checking the "value" of your key, which will be 1 from the server, while its 2, in your handing request. The only way it works at all is if the server is intercepting the call, converting the requests into a list that is *all* 1:1, then testing both against each other. But, this isn't a server call, its a call within Perl itself, which means the server only sees the original items you give the npc, not the requirements list.
I still don't see how Theeper can be right, and the code written as it is. It just shouldn't work with requests for more than one item, "period", no matter what context the Perl engine is running in.
Another reason I suspect he is wrong is simply because, while I have not made a comprehensive check of ever case, I haven't seen a single instance of check_handin used with a "I need more than one of these" check. I'll take a look again, and see if there is though.
|