If you've already broken apart the #property into sections, you can name your variables what you're searching for, and set them to #true. Like if you're looking for very specific things.

set %arrayMonitor #true
set %arrayBike #true
set %arrayKleenex #true
set %arrayCamera #true
Then when you break apart your #property string, or you could even use the whole #property, and you get your result from each part, you can do some code like this:

for %I 1 %numberOfStringChunks
{
  gosub breakStringApartRight
  set %stringChunk n/a
  if %array . #result = #true
    set %stringChunk #result
  if %stringChunk = n/a
    display The variable is not in the #property.
  if %stringChunk <> n/a
    display The variable is in the #property.
}
Then you can use the %stringChunk variable if it's found to be in the #property in any way you like, in a variable to find what you are looking for in #property, or perform an action based on that item because it's the #result from earlier in the script, and it's in the #property.

Quote from: BobOzarius on January 15, 2017, 08:07:22 AM

Until you prove it with code, it's still just your opinion that namespace is better with 3 to 5 clients. Consider this the challenge to prove it with script.    I'd like to see how you'd do it.

As far as the "how", this is the framework that Ghost is talking about from our long lost Cerveza:

http://www.scriptuo.com/index.php?topic=1130.msg8916#msg8916

I was around in 2009 when Cerveza posted that TM. I just haven't played UO much since.  I guess no one is up for a coding challenge!     I think I might just have to write tandj a script to do it for him.  If you'd like a bit more help tandj just say the word, and I'll whip you up something that will work for you pretty well. I have tamer accounts so I should be able to make something that attacks on the luck character and waits to send in the non luck clients easily. Personally I'd probly just keep those clients unpartied, so the one character gets high luck drops, and the others get low and mid range luck drops. What are you killing? It shouldn't be hard to make it auto attack and target attack friendly either. Using swap of course. The script above should do most of that. But I didn't know at the start you needed one client to attack first.

     Maybe I wasn't clear. I'd like to see an example because I'm very sure namespace isn't going to be the best option in this situation. Gbot won't show me anything new I don't know about namespaces. Assuming that Ghost thinks uoxl swap is a bad idea, then he must be saying that using multiple scripts with global namespaces, on each individual client, is a better option. I don't agree. Namespaces are a bit slow at transferring data. But if he can show me an example that proves his point, that applies to the original posters needs, I'll be happy to check it out and see if he's right. The op did ask for help. I can rewrite it with globals and multiple scripts if you'd like to compare. But I was hoping Ghost would prove his point with some code. For the benefit of the original poster.

     Say you have 5 accounts, and you're using one account to transfer info to each of the other 4 accounts with namespace globals, there is a slight pause in the transfer of data to the global namespace, and when other scripts in other tabs can read it that isn't present when you swap. Swapping is very speedy. And when you set a standard variable in easyuo, it's available immediately to any other client that you swap to, no namespace "lag." I think it all depends on the number of clients too, because there is a slight lag between the time it takes to swap between the first client and back around to the first client. If you're using 10 clients, namespace might be better. 6 or under? Swap is the way to go. If  you look at the example I posted, you'll see why it's a better option I think. Also it assumes he's moving the clients around manually using 1 mouse and each separately. Using my way they'd have to stay on screen with each other. I could edit it to make that not necessary pretty easily though. Tandj wasn't too clear on what he wanted it to do. So I just threw something together. If you have a better idea with namespaces though, I'm sure tandj would appreciate seeing multiple options.

So on a new monster, set a timer to have the #clinr of that client attack first, and set a timer to have the other clients attack 10 seconds after or something.  Should be very easy to do.

if #charid = %characterWithLuck && %attacktimer . #charid < #sysTime && %targetfound = #false... or something similar. Then have that character attack, and set a however many second timer you want to keep the other clients from attacking until that timer is up and the same monster is still found.  Shouldn't be too difficult. Then it will only attack with multiple clients if the monster lives long enough too. Tons of ways to do it easily.

It can also be that some spawn will spawn in areas where you can't see them, but the script picks them up. You should check their z-height. There is a lot of other info in the #findindex of the monsters you can't see that can help you debug what's going on. Post the info for all the items for each #findindex. Maybe there's something in there that can help.

#clilogged = 0 means you are logged out. Not dead. A small but important distinction. 

Use a whitelist. Hard code types you don't want to loot. Same with things you want to loot. And prioritize them based on want. One finditem and you can try to loot everything one after another. Without doing any other finditems.  And just crank your lpc up to find and prioritize things by type that are found.

I assumed getting the point value directly would be easy... I know, assume nothing right 

Parsing the point value is very easy, and very fast. But it's an in game action clicking a bod. It would end up being faster to just use #property and setting up variables with the info you need based on the property.