RO ProceduralParts Updates #1678
Merged
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
added 2 commits
June 14, 2017 10:45
rsparkyc
reviewed
Jun 15, 2017
| %title = Battery [Procedural] | ||
|
|
||
| %category = Electrical | ||
| @title = Battery [Procedural] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there any benefit of using @ over %? % makes it if it doesn't exist, otherwise does an update, correct? Is % any less efficient? It would seem like anytime we want to make sure we have something set, we should use %, where @ is "I only want to change this if it has a value"
|
Saves a branch.
…On Jun 15, 2017 1:58 PM, "Ryan Caskey" ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In GameData/RealismOverhaul/RO_RecommendedMods/Procedurals/
RO_ProceduralParts.cfg
<#1678 (comment)>
:
> @@ -1,7 +1,14 @@
@part[proceduralBattery]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]
{
%RSSROConfig = True
- %title = Battery [Procedural]
+
+ %category = Electrical
+ @title = Battery [Procedural]
Is there any benefit of using @ over %? % makes it if it doesn't exist,
otherwise does an update, correct? Is % any less efficient? It would seem
like anytime we want to make *sure* we have something set, we should use
%, where @ is "i only want to change this if it has a value"
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1678 (review)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AE5-IqbaRFNjqLLY9e4pvH2pMVhXdCpYks5sEZrxgaJpZM4N5gom>
.
|
|
Ok, so it sounds like, if we're pretty sure a value is already going to be there, we should be using |
|
It's also good for readability, % is ambiguous between replace and add
(i.e. if you don't know the original file).
If for a global engine config where we don't necessarily know what we're
patching, % is perfect.
…On Jun 15, 2017 2:03 PM, "Ryan Caskey" ***@***.***> wrote:
Ok, so it sounds like, if we're pretty sure a value is already going to be
there, we should be using @?
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1678 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AE5-Ijj4zcKaSgbzaHueaj--85YTrUEqks5sEZwPgaJpZM4N5gom>
.
|
rsparkyc
approved these changes
Jun 15, 2017
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.
Change log:
Tagging @rsparkyc (KSP-RO/RP-1#691)