Jump to content

TickEvent - why Phase over sub-event?


Recommended Posts

Like the title. While I don't really mind, it's been bothering me for a while now.


What I can clearly see is that with Phase being in TickEvent, you don't have to write Pre and Post sub-events for every sub-event of TickEvent.

On the other hand TickEvents are being used with specific Phase in probably 90%+ of cases, so every time we have to do that phase check instead of doing e.g: PlayerTickEvent.Pre.


So, aside from people being used to doing it (or even worse - not knowing about phases at all) and the fact that code will have few more mini-inner-classes, why don't we make it more "polymorphic"?

1.7.10 is no longer supported by forge, you are on your own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.