PneumaticCraft: Repressurized

PneumaticCraft: Repressurized

Mods
50M Downloads

API Request: Option to leverage TOP block probing without extending PNCR base class

mc-ganduron opened this issue ยท 4 comments

commented

I have some mod blocks I'm working on that provide PNCR capabilities. As a rule, I keep dependencies to a minimum, so I'm not currently extending PNCR's base classes. Naturally this may change in the future, but I'd like to use The One Probe to see the air/heat details of my blocks as they are coded now. I'm unable to do this because the probe is configured to test exclusively for BlockPneumaticCraft blocks:

pnc-repressurized/src/main/java/me/desht/pneumaticcraft/common/thirdparty/theoneprobe/TOPInit.java

Lines 49 to 56 in 606ffc0

public void addProbeInfo(ProbeMode mode, IProbeInfo probeInfo, PlayerEntity player, World world, BlockState blockState, IProbeHitData data) {
if (blockState.getBlock() instanceof BlockPneumaticCraft) {
TOPInfoProvider.handleBlock(mode, probeInfo, player, world, blockState, data);
}
SemiblockTracker.getInstance().getAllSemiblocks(world, data.getPos(), data.getSideHit())
.filter(sb -> !(sb instanceof IDirectionalSemiblock) || ((IDirectionalSemiblock) sb).getSide() == data.getSideHit())
.forEach(sb -> TOPInfoProvider.handleSemiblock(player, mode, probeInfo, sb));
}

The probe logic itself does not rely on BlockPneumaticCraft:

pnc-repressurized/src/main/java/me/desht/pneumaticcraft/common/thirdparty/theoneprobe/TOPInfoProvider.java

Lines 43 to 70 in 606ffc0

static void handleBlock(ProbeMode mode, IProbeInfo probeInfo, PlayerEntity player, World world, BlockState blockState, IProbeHitData data) {
TileEntity te = world.getTileEntity(data.getPos());
if (te instanceof IInfoForwarder) {
te = ((IInfoForwarder)te).getInfoTileEntity();
}
if (te == null) return;
if (te.getCapability(PNCCapabilities.AIR_HANDLER_MACHINE_CAPABILITY).isPresent()) {
handlePneumatic(mode, probeInfo, te);
}
if (te.getCapability(PNCCapabilities.HEAT_EXCHANGER_CAPABILITY).isPresent()) {
handleHeat(mode, probeInfo, te);
}
if (PNCConfig.Client.topShowsFluids) {
te.getCapability(CapabilityFluidHandler.FLUID_HANDLER_CAPABILITY, data.getSideHit())
.ifPresent(handler -> handleFluidTanks(mode, probeInfo, handler));
}
if (te instanceof IRedstoneControl) {
handleRedstoneMode(mode, probeInfo, (IRedstoneControl<?>) te);
}
if (te instanceof TileEntityPressureTube) {
handlePressureTube(mode, probeInfo, (TileEntityPressureTube) te, data.getSideHit(), player);
}
if (te instanceof ICamouflageableTE) {
handleCamo(mode, probeInfo, ((ICamouflageableTE) te).getCamouflage());
}
}

I'd like to propose a lighter option to leverage the probe block output so that extending BlockPneumaticCraft is not a requirement. If that sounds reasonable to you, I'll offer up two options...

Option 1: Create a tag interface to mark probe-able blocks. BlockPneumaticCraft would extend this interface, and the TOPInit code tests for this interface. Mod blocks would extend the interface to enable probe features. Example TOPInit code:

if (blockState.getBlock() instanceof IPneumaticCraftProbeBlock) { 
    TOPInfoProvider.handleBlock(mode, probeInfo, player, world, blockState, data); 
}

Option 2: Create a data tag to mark probe-able blocks. TOPInit would continue to test for BlockPneumaticCraft classes, and (failing that) also test if the block isIn the new data tag. Example TOPInit code:

Block block = blockState.getBlock();
if (block instanceof BlockPneumaticCraft || block.isIn(PneumaticCraftTags.Blocks.PROBE_TARGET)) { 
    TOPInfoProvider.handleBlock(mode, probeInfo, player, world, blockState, data); 
}

There are trade-offs in both cases, and there may be other good options as well. Let me know what you think.

commented

Also, while you're free to extend BlockPneumaticCraft in future, be aware of course that it's not an API class and could change at any time (whereas I try to keep the API stable as much as possible). So if you do find yourself needing to do that, let me know and maybe we can work out an API enhancement of some kind to keep it clean...

commented

Yep definitely a reasonable request. TBH, there's probably no good reason not to have both options, e.g.:

Block block = blockState.getBlock();
if (block instanceof IPneumaticCraftProbeable || block.isIn(PneumaticCraftTags.Blocks.PROBE_TARGET)) { 
    TOPInfoProvider.handleBlock(mode, probeInfo, player, world, blockState, data); 
}

And I'd probably name the interface something like IPneumaticCraftProbeable since it could also be applied to entities, in theory...

commented

TBH, there's probably no good reason not to have both options...

Awesome, thanks.

... be aware of course that it's not an API class ... So if you do find yourself needing to do that, let me know ...

I'm glad to hear that. I'm dipping into PNCR's common package for a few things I can't get from the API, but I need to see how much of that I actually rely on. I'll post a new issue for this after I get it sorted.

commented

Added in 2.13.4 release