Different way of writing “attackable” and “repairable” [closed]

Question

In programming, we say an object is capable of doing something. For example, an object may be drivable or repairable. This lets us know what actions the different parts of a computer program are able to perform or receive.

The English words we use don't have to actually exist, for example we can use dieable which could imply that the object can die. This is not a great example, but it should get the point across.

I'm looking for a way to express the capability for an object to attack something. If I say it's attackable then it implies it can be attacked, not that it's capable of attacking.

I also cannot use it attacks or it can attack as it should use the single word format with -able on the end if at all possible. It also cannot use hyphens and must be one word.

I am also looking for suggestions for repairable but implying that it performs repairs.

Answer 1

You have a few choices to indicate that something is capable of attacking. "Offensive", "offending", "aggressive", "aggressor", "harmful", and "combat[ive]" are possible choices.

As for indicating that something can perform repairs, you have options like "medic[al]", "service[r]", "maintainer", "aider", "mender".

I don't think there are "able" words that indicate an ability to do things to others the way you seem to want. Something is "X-able" if X can be done to it.

Answer 2

You might consider weaponised (or weaponisable) if you don't like attack-capable.

Answer 3

For the "it can attack"-able case, try weaponable and armable. For "it can repair"-able, perhaps medicable, from medic.