-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use item id instead of name in monster loot #3538
Conversation
If you prefer, I can keep (& add missing) comments with item name 🤔 |
Why did you remove the comments on item ids? It tells exactly what the user is editing and makes the whole thing readable. If you're using a script to convert that, call ItemType(itemId):getName() on each item id to generate comments again. |
Keeping the comment here also makes it easily outdated when items.xml are changed. There were already a few missing names used.
Do you just type things for the heck of typing? |
I'd rather have the item names and run the risk of duplicate item name. At a minimum the item names have to be kept as comments to make editing the files manageable. |
Will this be stalled until merge conflicts arise? |
To help with your decision: id's should be used because of name duplication - you can't reliably use item names as loot because multiple items can have the same name and the engine will pick the first id that it finds. Now when you look at #3540, non-unique item names use id's instead, but for one, that's inconsistent, and for two, nobody wants to maintain that. It's not future-proof, if item names ever get corrected and one ends up with a duplicate name Just use id's across the board and merge this PR. |
@EPuncker beep boop |
smh |
@DSpeichert this can be merged, I can't approve it because my browser lag with so many files |
I think someone suggested keeping both |
kthxbye |
Pull Request Prelude
Changes Proposed
Issues addressed: #3528