While we're on the topic, I'd like to request a diagonal_adjacent operator.
Because right now for those blocks I'm forced to use at for each individual block. e.g., at 1 1 -1, at 1 1 0, at 1 1 1, at 1 0 -1, etc.
Essentially the blocks in a 3x3x3 around a targeted block, that are not included by the adjacent operator (shorthand is @)
I'll admit that a nested cube brush could place blocks like that, but if I were to try to test for certain blocks there (like I would using @ and range), it takes a lot more jank to achieve the same thing. A diagonal version of @ would be super super convenient
14ercooper
commented
2 years ago
From SuperKirby:
While we're on the topic, I'd like to request a diagonal_adjacent operator.
Because right now for those blocks I'm forced to use at for each individual block. e.g., at 1 1 -1, at 1 1 0, at 1 1 1, at 1 0 -1, etc.
Essentially the blocks in a 3x3x3 around a targeted block, that are not included by the adjacent operator (shorthand is @)
I'll admit that a nested cube brush could place blocks like that, but if I were to try to test for certain blocks there (like I would using @ and range), it takes a lot more jank to achieve the same thing. A diagonal version of @ would be super super convenient