horrible-little-slime
commented
1 year ago The original intent was to shrink maximizer strings; I'll look to see if that logic can be relocated
On Sat, May 6, 2023, 12:18 AM no no @.***> wrote:
Ahh, you're right, that was the issue! I'll amend it in the morning, good shout
On Sat, May 6, 2023, 12:18 AM Jeffrey Dudek @.***> wrote:
@.**** commented on this pull request.
In src/outfit.ts https://github.com/Loathing-Associates-Scripting-Society/grimoire/pull/89#discussion_r1186615160 :
@@ -338,7 +338,8 @@ export class Outfit { } if (spec.bonuses) { for (const [item, value] of spec.bonuses) {
- succeeded &&= value + this.getBonus(item) === this.addBonus(item, value);
- this.addBonus(item, value);
- succeeded &&= this.bonuses.has(item);
Right now, this will still fail if the outfit cannot possibly equip the bonus item, because .addBonus calls .setBonus which calls .canEquip. Is this what we want to happen?
It might be smoother to remove the .canEquip call from .setBonus. Then the .addBonus/.setBonus call can never fail, and we rely on the maximizer to ignore impossible bonus items.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/Loathing-Associates-Scripting-Society/grimoire/pull/89#pullrequestreview-1415665179, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ASZNQVLQVS3NMLJ7XDC5RQLXEXGHRANCNFSM6AAAAAAXXPRTNA . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: <Loathing-Associates-Scripting-Society/grimoire/pull/89/review/1415665179 @github.com>
Ahh, you're right, that was the issue! I'll amend it in the morning, good shout
On Sat, May 6, 2023, 12:18 AM Jeffrey Dudek @.***> wrote: