-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
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
Stomach code refactor #35143
Merged
ZhilkinSerg
merged 9 commits into
CleverRaven:master
from
Davi-DeGanne:stomach-refactor
Nov 10, 2019
Merged
Stomach code refactor #35143
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
63936e8
Remove unused methods from stomach.cpp
aaf8a46
Combine several methods so stomach.cpp is simpler
Davi-DeGanne b006b3b
Make all_nutrition_starve_test far more strict
Davi-DeGanne 7fe9260
Implement suggestions from KorGgenT
Davi-DeGanne e6cfee1
Remove unused #includes
Davi-DeGanne 4b25ba7
Refactor ingest function
Davi-DeGanne 2a3c79e
Fix bug with stomach capacity calculation
Davi-DeGanne a38d174
Astyle
Davi-DeGanne f3670e8
Merge branch 'master' into stomach-refactor
Davi-DeGanne File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMHO this is more readable. "If it's not an NPC and we're using no NPC food" as opposed to "if it's not an NPC or we're not using no NPC food".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, this isn't a correct articulation of your version. That wording would represent
which isn't what we want. Your code itself is logically equivalent to mine, but I don't agree that yours is more readable.
I do agree that mine isn't particularly readable either though, I'll add a comment that explains it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah the parenthesis don't come across in the word version I wrote earlier. My code is more like "Unless it's an NPC and we're using No NPC Food". Instead of a comment it could move to a
should_process_food
method and thenif( should_process_food() ) {
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I still have to disagree, I think my version is more readable, and I don't want to add a function to a class we're trying to deprecate. I did add a comment though. I'll leave this conversation unresolved though so whoever goes to merge this can let me know if they think a change needs to be made.