Pull up Canary methods as far as possible.

[14mRh4X0r]

Currently there are many methods in our classes that can be pulled up into superclasses. This would allow for more freedom for plugin developers while maintaining compatibility.

[WWOL]

Would this work without plugins needing a recompile? If so that's pretty awesome.

WWOL

[14mRh4X0r]

I'd need to check that, but I believe it would.

[WWOL]

Sounds awesome.

WWOL

[BluXDragon]

I take it this is like how addPotionEffect was for Player instead of LivingEntity, despite it working just fine?
I'm happy to report things like that when I find/remember them. I've seen quite a few.

[gregcarlin]

Couldn't everything we currently have in Mob be in LivingEntity?

[14mRh4X0r]

Nope, setTarget for example, casts entity to OEntityCreature.

[gregcarlin]

So the constructor for Mob should really take OEntityCreature, not OEntityLiving, correct?

[14mRh4X0r]

Technically, it should, yeah. LivingEntity and Mob overlap, in that aspect.

[BluXDragon]

I would love getLocation() to be pulled up to BaseEntity. Pitch/Rot could be null for things that don't have such values?

[gregcarlin]

@14mRh4X0r OEntityGhast is not an instance of OEntityCreature.

[14mRh4X0r]

I know, that's why I said they overlap. setTarget doesn't work for ghasts, either.
On another note, testing needs to be done to verify that this doesn't break plugins.

[BluXDragon]

I'll be doing that, h4X. I'm keeping pretty up-to-date on the dev builds.

[BluXDragon]

Plugins involving Mob.getItemInHand() have broken, as the method has changed to getItemStackInHand()

[gregcarlin]

This was expected. It was necessary for compatibility with the method in
Player, and the only plugins it would break would be no more than a couple
weeks old and likely still under active development.

On Dec 3, 2012, at 10:41 AM, BluXDragon notifications@github.com wrote:

Plugins involving Mob.getItemInHand() have broken, as the method has
changed to getItemStackInHand()

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on
GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/71#issuecomment-10957890.