Skip to content
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

Remove unused stuffs #3228

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

NeeEoo
Copy link
Contributor

@NeeEoo NeeEoo commented Aug 11, 2024

This removes some old stuff which was no longer used.

Comment on lines 597 to 599
static var renderPoint:FlxPoint = FlxPoint.get();
static var renderPoint:FlxPoint = new FlxPoint();

static var renderRect:FlxRect = FlxRect.get();
static var renderRect:FlxRect = new FlxRect();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why change this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Its incorrect usage, since its a static it is only ever gotten once. And never .put(). And if someone were to use .put on it it would break

Copy link
Member

@Geokureli Geokureli Aug 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I disagree that it's "incorrect", it makes absolutely no difference

public inline function new(x:Float = 0, y:Float = 0)
{
this = FlxPoint.get(x, y);
}

plus, using get isn't an indication that it's okay to call put

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh i didnt know it was changed. It used to make a difference before the reworked in commit e721fca. Should i revert the commit?

Copy link
Member

@Geokureli Geokureli Aug 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What difference did it make? I don't understand what you're referring to, or why we would revert anything

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Eh just forget it. Do i need to do anything?

@NeeEoo NeeEoo requested a review from Geokureli August 16, 2024 20:14
@NeeEoo NeeEoo changed the title Remove unused stuffs + small fix Remove unused stuffs Aug 16, 2024
@Geokureli
Copy link
Member

I'm not interested in these changes at the moment, at some point I'd like to assess whether we can add blendmode support back in, until then I'd leave it as is

@Geokureli Geokureli closed this Aug 21, 2024
@NeeEoo
Copy link
Contributor Author

NeeEoo commented Aug 21, 2024

I'm not interested in these changes at the moment, at some point I'd like to assess whether we can add blendmode support back in, until then I'd leave it as is

This was used when FLX_DRAW_TILES still existed.
But now it doesn't exist anymore, so the code isnt used.

And quads still uses blend modes with overrideBlendMode() in flxdrawquaditem

@Geokureli
Copy link
Member

I'm aware, as I said, I think before we gut it we should see if it can be reimplemented

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants