Port ToMe25's PR for sawing factories #5383
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Everything seems to work properly to me, so I believe this can be merged once a second set of eyes reviews it. |
thiakil
approved these changes
Apr 12, 2019
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Changes proposed in this pull request:
@ToMe25 if you could double check this branch works as intended that would be great. I inlined a helper method of yours and also added the missing blockstate files as the blocks and item variants were untextured.
I still need to test this more myself, and I am not quite sure about how clear it will be to people that if they want to multiprocess using the sawing factories the secondary outputs of all items need to be the same or one stack won't be processed. Though at least on the surface everything seems to be working properly and looks good.