Currently, the ch30_loop core relies on a label that enforces a mandatory waiting period. While this is functional, it isn't necessarily best practice. We should move to an await/has awaited system in line with our sister mods to keep things cleaner.
Must haves:
Switch to await/has awaited approach for ch30_loop
Could haves:
N/A
Is this feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Blizzardsev
commented
1 year ago 
Overview:
Currently, the
ch30_loopcore relies on a label that enforces a mandatory waiting period. While this is functional, it isn't necessarily best practice. We should move to an await/has awaited system in line with our sister mods to keep things cleaner.Must haves:
ch30_loopCould haves:
N/A
Is this feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
This is related to existing core code.