Merged
Conversation
Alternatively, could stay as `pe` and simply have the static typing declaration like this: ```gdscript var pe: PropertyEntry = _property_cache.get_entry(node) ``` I prefer the static typing declaration myself, e.g. because it gives you the type and highlights it so you can just press `Ctrl` on it Btw that commit chain is weird, should I try to rebase or squash or sth? Has been a while since I did that --------- Co-authored-by: Tamás Gálffy <ezittgtx@gmail.com>
…ick` (#306) The buffer inside `get_history()` can have only 2 possible variables: `_inputs` and `_states`. Both have their dictionary key be a tick (`int`) --------- Co-authored-by: Tamás Gálffy <ezittgtx@gmail.com>
It is easy to be confused with the variable names because of no static typings. `properties` for example are not properties but PropertyEntries. It makes it confusing to the reader as to what any variable is, especially new users to the codebase. This PR had to be made because in the netfox discord I saw someone asking 'how can I sync props' and someone asked 'properties or props' and the reply was actually props ala prop hunt lol Basically the current naming convention causes a lot of confusion. The first suggestion and the implementation of this is to convert `props` to `property_entries` The second suggestion is to rename `property` of type `String` to `property_name`, and have the name `property` be the `PropertyEntry` itself. I am against this second suggestion because this repo has no static typing as coding convention, so `property` being `PropertyEntry` is just weird, while `property_entry` being of type `PropertyEntry` is intuitive. --------- Co-authored-by: Tamás Gálffy <ezittgtx@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Merge of #305, #306, and #308