Simplify c2c packets #663
Open
Simplify c2c packets #663
Conversation
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
Closed
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Big thanks to @wagyourtail. Since we can rely on the
senderfield of aClientboundPlayerChatPacket, it is superfluous to include this information in the C2C packet too. This PR excludes that field from transmission.Because of how this is implemented, listening to C2C packets through
/clistenwill display thesenderfield as if it were encoded in the C2C packet. On the one hand this makes sense; the C2C packet classes all have this field. On the other hand it doesn't; it is not actually included in the packet that is transmitted. I'll let others comment on which is better. It could even be made configurable.