EffBlockUpdate

[Absolutionism]

Description

This PR aims to allow updating blocks with or without neighbor physic updates

---

Target Minecraft Versions: any
Requirements: none
Related Issues: #6394

[Efnilite]

#7020 (comment)

[Absolutionism]

#7020 (comment)

Yeah I know, before I even ported it over, I had started making it from scratch without referencing from SkBee. I understand the entire thing and when I got the basic setup done, it was looking almost like SkBee's.

[cheeezburga]

Just some styling type stuff, didn't have time to properly go through it at all.

[sovdeeth]

#7020 (comment)

Yeah I know, before I even ported it over, I had started making it from scratch without referencing from SkBee. I understand the entire thing and when I got the basic setup done, it was looking almost like SkBee's.

I'd also like to double down here and say that even if you wrote it and it looked like skbee's, you should still write it yourself! for one (as pikachu has mentioned previously) it avoids licensing issues related to GPL vs MIT (which we are slowly moving towards), second, it makes sure you know exactly what the code is doing and why, and third, it avoids potentially falling into the same anchoring bias. The description is a bit unclear on whether you wrote this yourself or copy-pasted it, but I would strongly ask that if you did copy paste sections, you undo that and write it yourself. Though at this point I don't know how effective that is given you'd probably just write the same code you are replacing because of said anchoring.

[Absolutionism]

it makes sure you know exactly what the code is doing and why

I do know what code is doing and why, I even added my own touch to it which should at the very least show that I do

The description is a bit unclear on whether you wrote this yourself or copy-pasted it

That's mainly because I'm just bad at explaining things

[sovdeeth]

Yes sorry I didn't mean to imply that you don't understand the code, I just mean that writing it yourself guarantees that you do. It's just one aspect of a few that make me wary of directly ported code.

But really, the big concern that can't really be worked around is the licensing issue.

Also, your self-proclaimed explaining skills notwithstanding, can you elaborate on what exactly you changed/added/wrote and what was ported directly?

[Absolutionism]

Changed:
Descriptions, to the best of my ability
toString()
Examples

Added / Wrote:
New pattern + "mechanic"
Test
Lang entry
registerClass (bare minimum)

Ported:
Examples
Initial pattern
Original var names
The rest of the registerClass (.parse)

[Moderocky]

I'm not really clear what value BlockState has as an added type.
All I can see is a complicated way to change something without updating the blocks around it (which sounds useful but this seems like a lot of changes for just that)

[Absolutionism]

I'm not really clear what value BlockState has as an added type. All I can see is a complicated way to change something without updating the blocks around it (which sounds useful but this seems like a lot of changes for just that)

Well, again, I was just introducing BlockStates into Skript, to "future proof" for any possible PRs that would utilize BlockStates. But if you feel, that it should just be added from a PR that is extensive on the utilization and accessibility of BlockStates, then I can remove it from this PR and just rename the PR.

[Fusezion]

my review doesn't matter, and I don't remember what my review was for I believe it's related to a comment nothin important

[Moderocky]

Mostly ok.