[z-machine] Different 1.1 proposal: put_prop and get_prop

[Matthew T. Russotto]

On Monday, August 4, 2003, at 05:37 AM, Cedric Knight wrote:

> I'm raising this after a thread on raif.
>
> The 1.0 standard says of @get_prop (& @put_prop), 'It is illegal for
> the opcode to be used if the property has length greater than 2, and
> the result is unspecified.'  However, Inform will compile (obj.prop)
> to one of these operands, and it looks like some fairly major
> modifications and overhead for it to do otherwise.  Nitfol gets and
> puts the first word of property data, while Zip and Frotz point to one
> less than this address (so they read and write the extended length
> byte possibly resulting in corruption).  Zoom seems to be the only
> terp which produces an error.

The ZIP behavior matches the Infocom behavior, so IMO it should remain 
illegal.