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

Automapping: "regions" layers should imply MatchInOrder #3559

Closed
eishiya opened this issue Jan 27, 2023 · 0 comments
Closed

Automapping: "regions" layers should imply MatchInOrder #3559

eishiya opened this issue Jan 27, 2023 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
feature It's a feature, not a bug.

Comments

@eishiya
Copy link
Contributor

eishiya commented Jan 27, 2023

Tiled 1.9+ uses the existence of "regions" layers to determine whether Automapping rules should always use the old behaviour where tiles that are empty in all layers behave as "Other", allowing old rule maps to behave correctly in 1.9+ instead of breaking. However, a major difference in 1.9+ is that rules are executed out of order by default, while in older versions, rules always executed in order. This means that old rules are still likely to run incorrectly in 1.9+, and users have to update their rulemaps even if they keep their "regions" layers.

In the interest of backwards compatibility, I think that if a rulemap has "regions" layers and does not have a specific value for MatchInOrder set, MatchInOrder should be treated as true. If there is a specific value set, that value should be used.

@eishiya eishiya added the feature It's a feature, not a bug. label Jan 27, 2023
@bjorn bjorn self-assigned this Jan 27, 2023
@bjorn bjorn closed this as completed in f0b998a Feb 2, 2023
dogboydog pushed a commit to dogboydog/tiled that referenced this issue Feb 4, 2023
This improves compatibility with AutoMapping rules written for older
versions of Tiled.

Closes mapeditor#3559
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature It's a feature, not a bug.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants