Re: Further notes about 0.90.1.

[Mark Wedel <master@rahul.net>]

 I think the actual complaint was in the .arc file and the field names.
Not how the program handles it internally.

 There is certainly nothing preventing more useful field names in the
archetypes structure.  Crossfire could then know that something like
'charges' in a archetype descritpion actually goes into the food field
in the structure.

 Unions of the object structure might be a good idea, but would require
going over the code very closely, to make sure that for a sword object
you are accessing the correct field names (or for wand arcehtype, that
you are accessing the charges field, and not the food field.)

 A 'nicer' idea that exists in C++ is anonymous unions.  But I don't think
we want to require a C++ compiler just for anonymous unions.

--Mark