I’m starting to think what I want to do, can’t be done given the current limitations on macros, but perhaps I’m missing something–something one of you might be able to correct.
I have a hunter, Level 68. His main pet is a Frostsaber (Cat); he recently tamed a 67 Wind Serpent (the green one from Blade’s Edge Mountains). I also have a feed/mend pet macro I use (thanks, BRK!). The macro works great in this form when the cat is out:
/cast [combat] Mend Pet/cast [nocombat,modifier:shift] Mend Pet
/cast [nocombat,nomodifier] Feed Pet
/use [nocombat,nomodifier] Clefthoof Ribs
and when the wind serpent is out:
/cast [combat] Mend Pet
/cast [nocombat,modifier:shift] Mend Pet
/cast [nocombat,nomodifier] Feed Pet
/use [nocombat,nomodifier] Bladespire Bagel
But what I would like, is to use one macro for both pets, and have it use the appropriate food for each (I know: Just buy fish, right? Work with me here! 
). Here’s what I have so far:
/cast [combat] Mend Pet
/cast [nocombat,modifier:shift] Mend Pet
/cast [nocombat,nomodifier] Feed Pet
/use [nocombat,nomodifier] [pet: Cat] Clefthoof Ribs, [pet: Wind Serpent] Bladespire Bagel
Interestingly, if the Wind Serpent is out, this works fine. If the Cat is out, I get “Your pet doesn’t like that food.” Conversely, if the last line of the macro is
/use [nocombat,nomodifier] [pet: Wind Serpent] Bladespire Bagel, [pet: Cat] Clefthoof Ribs
then it works for the Cat, but I get the “doesn’t like that food” error for the Wind Serpent.
I played around with various combinations of commas, slashes, semicolons and blanks between the pets, but can’t do any better than feed one pet. Using two /use statements only gets the first one read.
As I alluded to above, I could simply resolve the issue by feeding fish to both–but at this point, it’s the principle of the thing: CAN a macro be written to accomplish this?
Anyone? Bueller?
um, pet SEMICOLON [type]? I was thinking it was colon.
see http://www.wowinsider.com/2007/06/20/big-red-kitty-a-little-deeper-with-hunter-macros/
Those are colons, honest. The semicolons I used were between the [pet:] portions.
BRK’s macro:
/cast Feed Pet
/use [pet:cat] Clefthoof Ribs
/use [pet:warp stalker] Telaari Grapes
was the first thing I tried, long before I even knew of BRK. It didn’t work either, which is why I am trying the more “elegant” one-line solution. But, I’ll retry the multiple /use commands to see if perhaps I screwed up before (it’s been known to happen).
Ahhh…duh. The difference is the [pet:] command: I had NOT used that in my earliest macro, and the two separate /use commands, specifying a pet in each one, works perfectly. Thanks for the tip, Kirk!
If you’re wanting it on one line, I’d try:
/use [nocombat,nomodifier,pet:cat] Clefthoof Ribs; [nocombat,nomodifier,pet:warp stalker] Telaari Grapes
Remember:
comma is boolean AND.
Colon is if-then link.
Semicolon is CASE (or sequence – do to this mark. if unable to do, do from this mark to this mark. continue…).
Slash is boolean OR (pet:cat/wolf).
“no” is NOT.
The big reason your macro doesn’t work is the comma after bagels. It’s trying to feed the cat the ribs, and then the bagels. boolean “or” – inclusive of both.
Your macro has what look like semicolons for colons (you say otherwise, I believe you, but your font is weird). It also has a comma (boolean OR) instead of semicolon after the Bagel. Finally, the way it’s set up if it was unable to feed the first pet it’d try to feed the second EVEN IF you were in combat — [nocombat] is stripped by the semicolon, only /use continues.
Hmm…your browser must be rendering the font a lot differently than mine does–even the italics are clearly colons.
At any rate–the comma…that was left over from when I was getting frustrated last night. I forgot to strip it back out when I copied it here, but thanks for that. And your one-line solution is the obvious thing I missed: Putting the qualifiers twice.
I thought about it, but never tried it…thinking that it would only be read once, regardless. But of course, seeing it as you presented it, makes perfect sense, as it should.
Thanks again, Kirk–appreciate the other set of eyes seeing what I couldn’t.
You’re welcome. Today – after a good night’s sleep instead of preceding the recovery from a long day (grin) – I see why I’m reading those punctuation points the way I am. It’s the italicization. Looked at in awake enough fashion the variation is obvious. Note the word “awake”.