Very simple code won't work

[D_Light]

I have a simple code of:

If Value "Locked" of Object 1 = 0 then move object +1 to the right

If Object 1 overlaps Object 2 then set set Value "Locked" of Object 1 to 1 (stopping the movment)

If Object 1 is not overlapping object 2 then set "Locked" to 0 (starting the movement again)

This works fine if I move Object 2 out of the way. However, if I DESTROY object 2 while object 1 is overlapping it, the value "Locked" doesn't change. (I made sure of it by using a counter)

Anybody know what's going on?

Thanks

[D_Light]

So it seems as though if an object isn't created on the screen then other objects' code won't interact with it? That's what I'm guessing from doing a few tests.

[Ziplock]

Can't you just eliminate that value and say:

Object 1 IS NOT overlapping Object 2:
-> Add 1 to x position of Object 1

[D_Light]

Ya I tried that and it didn't change anything.

It seems though that if I have a copy of Object 2 when I destroy it then object 1 will move. That's why I'm thinking that you need a copy of an object on the field in order for a code to interact with it, even if that code is that it isn't being overlapped by anything.

[Ziplock]

Well I'll be. Looks like you're right. But simple enough solution - just create an extra instance of object 2 and throw it offscreen.

Good find. That might save me hours of frustration in the future.

[D_Light]

Ya that's what I did. Unfortunately that causes complications with other parts of my game (ID loops interacting with other objects and such). I don't really see an alternative though. Oh well.

Thanks for the input

[bybyblue]

If I'm correct this is what you want.

-always
+Set Object 1 Value "Locked" to 0

-If Object 1 overlaps Object 2
+Set Object 1 Value "Locked" to 1

In that order.

[D_Light]

Haha now I feel silly for not doing that in the first place. I guess I was just caught up in the original problem of the destroyed object :P

Thanks for that

[bybyblue]

Np, glad to help.

[Ziplock]

Hah, can't reference a non-existent object, so you reversed it - awesome!! Wonder if I'll ever master the basics of programming.