Skip to content

Conversation

@Laike-Endaril
Copy link
Contributor

Working...for the most part.

Only thing that doesn't work right is the mob-specific stuff...by which I mean ALL the mob-specific stuff, including the previously existing xp settings. I ran another test of it using the released version on curseforge (1.6.2), and it doesn't work on the released version either, so that's not from me.

I have all the same style code logic in there, though, so if whatever existing loading issue is fixed, my own new mob-specific settings should start working right along with the mob-specific xp settings.

"Default settings" for vanilla spawners and custom spawners seem to be working flawlessly, for all settings, so here's the PR :)

Copy link
Owner

@Pyrofab Pyrofab left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry for being late, I have a lot to do and I actually forgot about this Pull Request :/
There are a few things that need to be changed, but nothing major.

//Try/catch handles this if null
item = Item.getItemFromBlock(ForgeRegistries.BLOCKS.getValue(itemRL));
}
drops.add(new EntityItem(world, x, y, z, new ItemStack(item, split.length < 3 ? 1 : Integer.parseInt(split[2]), split.length < 4 ? 0 : Integer.parseInt(split[3]))));
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The values computed from split should each be stored in a variable with an explicit name. This line is too long, and the parameters to new ItemStack() are not immediately obvious.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I opted not to put the "chance" (index 4) part of the split strings into an explicit variable, because it would either prevent a possible short-circuit optimization (which is not a big deal in this case, but still bugs me), or add another level of bracing (and an additional boolean)

If you want the chance in an explicit var anyway, just poke me one more time and I'll do it lol

Leaving just this one "unresolved" in case you still want changes to it

@Laike-Endaril
Copy link
Contributor Author

Need to leave for work; will fix the last one when I get back (or maybe during lunch)

@Laike-Endaril
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hey sorry, I ended up working through lunch and then heading to my cousin's wedding...which was late, long, and an hour away :P

Anyway, I think it's ready for another check. Hopefully I didn't do anything dumb since I'm half asleep. I'm off to bed

@Pyrofab Pyrofab self-requested a review June 9, 2019 12:42
@Pyrofab Pyrofab merged commit 623dac4 into Pyrofab:master Jun 9, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants