-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 737
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
make use of new getAllHitpointsDamage command #2319
Conversation
…unctions about hitpoints
@@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ PREP(getConfigGunner); | |||
PREP(getConfigCommander); | |||
PREP(getHitPoints); | |||
PREP(getHitPointsWithSelections); | |||
PREP(getSelectionsWithoutHitPoints); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A better name might be getSelections
so it would mirror getHitPoints
, that automatically implies it's without anything else.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But those are only the selections that don't have any hitpoint assigned, not all damageable selections.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not just make them into one function anyways and parameterize it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not just make them into one function anyways and parameterize it?
It's a completely different approach as getHitpoints. I personally don't like the overhead that comes with checking optinal parameters when nothing but one line is shared between both functions.
common code cleanup part 10, close #2319
No description provided.