Jump to content

[UNSOLVED]Try to remove a recipe


DarkNinja2462

Recommended Posts

I tried to remove a vanilla recipe by deleting it from the list. It is the recipe for making pumpkin seeds.

    	ShapedRecipes noRecipe1 = this.getShapedRecipesFromRecipe(new ItemStack(Item.pumpkinSeeds, 4), new Object[] {"M", 'M', Block.pumpkin});
    	CraftingManager.getInstance().getRecipeList().remove(noRecipe1);

FYI: getShapedRecipesFromRecipe is a method I made that mimics the CraftingManager.addRecipe except it doesn't add the recipe to the list.

Please tell me what I am doing wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not really CPU heavy, it only gets called once when the mod's loaded.

 

 

A few helpful lines:


    List<IRecipe> recipes = CraftingManager.getInstance().getRecipeList();

This gets the recipe list.

 

            if (ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(resultItem, recipeResult)) {
                recipes.remove(i--);
                    }

This, in conjunction with a few other things allows you to compare an itemstack passed in (resultItem) and the result of the recipe, which you can get with:

 

ItemStack recipeResult = recipe.getRecipeOutput();

 

Don't want to spoil too much ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

private static void removeRecipe(ItemStack resultItem) {

List<IRecipe> recipes = CraftingManager.getInstance().getRecipeList();

for (int i = 0; i < recipes.size(); i++)

{

IRecipe tmpRecipe = recipes.get(i);

if (tmpRecipe instanceof ShapedRecipes) {

ShapedRecipes recipe = (ShapedRecipes)tmpRecipe;

ItemStack recipeResult = recipe.getRecipeOutput();

 

if (ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(resultItem, recipeResult)) {

recipes.remove(i--);

}

}

}

}

 

i copied the it from TFC

 

the code have to be inside your commonproxy and it have to look like this if you want to remove a recipe

 

removeRecipe(new ItemStack(Block.blockGold, 1));

 

you have to make the output too! removeRecipe(new ItemStack(block, size, meta));

if the output is not the same as the in the recipe the function will not work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

A few helpful lines:


    List<IRecipe> recipes = CraftingManager.getInstance().getRecipeList();

This gets the recipe list.

 

Strange enough, but that doesn't seem to contain all of the recipes. Tools besides shears, weapons, and several varieties of rails are missing (as well as a bunch more, I'm sure. Those are just the ones I noticed when trying to work this out.) I realized this when I was playing around with trying to override the recipe for an iron pickaxe and the code (a variation on Moritz's theme) never triggered.  So I decided to check just what the list contained:

 

 

                    System.out.println("DEBUG: Starting Recipe Scan");
            ItemStack recipeResult = null;
            List recipes = List CraftingManager.getInstance().getRecipeList();
            	            
            for (int scan = 0; scan < recipes.size(); scan++)
            {
                IRecipe tmpRecipe = (IRecipe) recipes.get(scan);
                if (tmpRecipe instanceof ShapedRecipes)
                {
                    ShapedRecipes recipe = (ShapedRecipes)tmpRecipe;
                    recipeResult = recipe.getRecipeOutput();	                    
                }

                if (tmpRecipe instanceof ShapelessRecipes)
                {
                    ShapelessRecipes recipe = (ShapelessRecipes)tmpRecipe;
                    recipeResult = recipe.getRecipeOutput();	                    
                }
                
                System.out.println("[DEBUG] Result: " + recipeResult);

               

 

 

I looked at CraftingManager.java and RecipesTools.java, and it looks like the tools should be added to the list as well, but they don't come up. I'm not sure if this is a bug or if I'm doing something wrong with .getRecipeList(). If the latter, though feel free to laugh and point out my foolishness. :)

 

 

(NB: As I'm still new here, I wasn't sure of the etiquette and preference between thread necromancy or duplication. I decided to opt for the one that showed I was, in fact, using the search bar.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi. Sorry for need so much time for solve the problem.

I had so much trouble and i did not came to code.

 

Now a perfect solved. It removes recipes.

public static void removeRecipe(ItemStack par1)
{
     List<IRecipe> recipeList = CraftingManager.getInstance().getRecipeList();
     for(int i=0;i<recipeList.size();i++)
     {
          IRecipe currentRecipe = recipeList.get(i);
          if(currentRecipe instanceof ShapedRecipes)
          {
               ShapedRecipes shape = (ShapedRecipes)currentRecipe;
               ItemStack output = shape.getRecipeOutput();
               if(ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(par1, output))
               {
                    recipeList.remove(i);
               }
          }

          if(currentRecipe instanceof ShapelessRecipes)
          {
               ShapelessRecipes shapeless = (ShapelessRecipes)currentRecipe;
               ItemStack output = shapeless.getRecipeOutput();
               if(ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(par1, output))
               {
                     recipeList.remove(i);
               }
          }
     }
}

 

I am current to busy to make more options.

 

I hope it helps^^"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Finally have the chance to play with the code. Still not having any luck, but I think I've nailed down the problem.

 

Certain recipes, including the tools, weapons, bed, workbench, etc... seem to be instances of neither shaped nor shapeless.

 

I modified the inner check of the code like this:

 

if(currentRecipe instanceof ShapedRecipes)
                  {
                       ShapedRecipes shape = (ShapedRecipes)currentRecipe;
                       ItemStack output = shape.getRecipeOutput();
                       if(ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(par1, output))
                       {                    	   
                            recipeList.remove(i);
                            System.out.println("Removed recipe successfully");
                       } else {
                    	   /*System.out.print(par1);
                    	   System.out.print(" is not eq to ");
                    	   System.out.println(output);
                    	   */
                       }
                  } else if(currentRecipe instanceof ShapelessRecipes)
                  {
                       ShapelessRecipes shapeless = (ShapelessRecipes)currentRecipe;
                       ItemStack output = shapeless.getRecipeOutput();
                       if(ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(par1, output))
                       {
                             recipeList.remove(i);
                             System.out.println("Removed recipe successfully");
                       }
                  } else {
                	  ItemStack output = currentRecipe.getRecipeOutput();
                	  System.out.print("DEBUG: ");
                	  System.out.print(output);
                	  System.out.println(" is neither shaped nor shapeless");
                  }

 

And my output confirmed my suspicions:

 

 

...

2013-08-24 12:02:12 [iNFO] [sTDOUT] DEBUG: 1xitem.pickaxeWood@0 is neither shaped nor shapeless

2013-08-24 12:02:12 [iNFO] [sTDOUT] DEBUG: 1xitem.pickaxeStone@0 is neither shaped nor shapeless

2013-08-24 12:02:12 [iNFO] [sTDOUT] DEBUG: 1xitem.pickaxeIron@0 is neither shaped nor shapeless

2013-08-24 12:02:12 [iNFO] [sTDOUT] DEBUG: 1xitem.pickaxeDiamond@0 is neither shaped nor shapeless

2013-08-24 12:02:12 [iNFO] [sTDOUT] DEBUG: 1xitem.pickaxeGold@0 is neither shaped nor shapeless

2013-08-24 12:02:12 [iNFO] [sTDOUT] DEBUG: 1xitem.bow@0 is neither shaped nor shapeless

2013-08-24 12:02:12 [iNFO] [sTDOUT] DEBUG: 1xtile.chest@0 is neither shaped nor shapeless

...

 

 

When I change the "debug" conditional at the end to

 

   } else {
           ItemStack output = currentRecipe.getRecipeOutput();
           if (ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(output, par1)){
                 recipeList.remove(i);             
           }

 

It works!

 

So I guess the moral of the story is that there are recipes that are neither shaped nor shapeless (in terms of "instanceOf", at least).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've taken the liberty of trimming down some code based on Moritz's, just to eliminate some duplicated code and to handle the tools and whatnot. I'll leave it here in case it helps someone else. Thanks to Moritz for doing all the heavy lifting on it!

 

 

 

public static void removeRecipe(ItemStack par1)
        {        	
             List<IRecipe> recipeList = CraftingManager.getInstance().getRecipeList();
             for(int i=0;i<recipeList.size();i++)
             {     
            	  ItemStack output;
                  IRecipe currentRecipe = recipeList.get(i);                  
                  if(currentRecipe instanceof ShapedRecipes)
                  {
                       ShapedRecipes shape = (ShapedRecipes)currentRecipe;
                       output = shape.getRecipeOutput();
                  } else if(currentRecipe instanceof ShapelessRecipes) 
                  {
                	  ShapelessRecipes shapeless = (ShapelessRecipes)currentRecipe;
                  	  output = shapeless.getRecipeOutput();
                  } else 
                  {
                	  output = currentRecipe.getRecipeOutput();
                  }
                  if (ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(output, par1))
                  {
                	  recipeList.remove(i);
                  }
             }
             
        }

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Instance of" checks are completely useless for this.

By the way this solution

ItemStack output = currentRecipe.getRecipeOutput();
if (ItemStack.areItemStacksEqual(output, par1)){
      recipeList.remove(i);             
}

was already suggested by zedicus 10 posts ago.

The moral of this story is that it is better to understand code and to listen to people. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be wrong, but I don't think you should remove anything through an iterator. I don't even know why java allows this, just to say "beware, the behaviour of the iterator will be undetermined if you alter the collection in any way". So why allow us alter the collection in the first place...? Why did it have to be java, God...?

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.

Guest
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.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I'm developing a dimension, but it's kinda resource intensive so some times during player teleporting it lags behind making the player phase down into the void, so im trying to implement some kind of pregeneration to force the game loading a small set of chunks in the are the player will teleport to. Some of the things i've tried like using ServerLevel and ServerChunkCache methods like getChunk() dont actually trigger chunk generation if the chunk isn't already on persistent storage (already generated) or placing tickets, but that doesn't work either. Ideally i should be able to check when the task has ended too. I've peeked around some pregen engines, but they're too complex for my current understanding of the system of which I have just a basic understanding (how ServerLevel ,ServerChunkCache  and ChunkMap work) of. Any tips or other classes I should be looking into to understand how to do this correctly?
    • https://mclo.gs/4UC49Ao
    • Way back in the Forge 1.17 days, work started for adding JPMS (Java Platform Module Support) to ModLauncher and ForgeModLoader. This has been used internally by Forge and some libraries for a while now, but mods (those with mods.toml specifically) have not been able to take advantage of it. As of Forge 1.21.1 and 1.21.3, this is now possible!   What is JPMS and what does it mean for modders? JPMS is the Java Platform Module System, introduced in Java 9. It allows you to define modules, which are collections of packages and resources that can be exported or hidden from other modules. This allows for much more fine-tuned control over visibility, cleaner syntax for service declarations and support for sealed types across packages. For example, you might have a mod with a module called `com.example.mod` that exports `com.example.mod.api` and `com.example.mod.impl` to other mods, but hides `com.example.mod.internal` from them. This would allow you to have a clean API for other mods to use, while keeping your internal implementation details hidden from IDE hints, helping prevent accidental usage of internals that might break without prior notice. This is particularly useful if you'd like to use public records with module-private constructors or partially module-private record components, as you can create a sealed interface that only your record implements, having the interface be exported and the record hidden. It's also nice for declaring and using services, as you'll get compile-time errors from the Java compiler for typos and the like, rather than deferring to runtime errors. In more advanced cases, you can also have public methods that are only accessible to specific other modules -- handy if you want internal interactions between multiple of your own mods.   How do I bypass it? We understand there may be drama in implementing a system that prevents mods from accessing each other's internals when necessary (like when a mod is abandoned or you need to fix a compat issue) -- after all, we are already modding a game that doesn't have explicit support for Java mods yet. We have already thought of this and are offering APIs from day one to selectively bypass module restrictions. Let me be clear: Forge mods are not required to use JPMS. If you don't want to use it, you don't have to. The default behaviour is to have fully open, fully exported automatic modules. In Java, you can use the `Add-Opens` and `Add-Exports` manifest attributes to selectively bypass module restrictions of other mods at launch time, and we've added explicit support for these when loading your Forge mods. At compile-time, you can use existing solutions such as the extra-java-module-info Gradle plugin to deal with non-modular dependencies and add extra opens and exports to other modules. Here's an example on how to make the internal package `com.example.examplemod.internal` open to your mod in your build.gradle: tasks.named('jar', Jar) { manifest { attributes([ 'Add-Opens' : 'com.example.examplemod/com.example.examplemod.internal' 'Specification-Title' : mod_id, 'Specification-Vendor' : mod_authors // (...) ]) } } With the above in your mod's jar manifest, you can now reflectively access the classes inside that internal package. Multiple entries are separated with a space, as per Java's official spec. You can also use Add-Exports to directly call without reflection, however you'd need to use the Gradle plugin mentioned earlier to be able to compile. The syntax for Add-Exports is the same as Add-Opens, and instructions for the compile-time step with the Gradle plugin are detailed later in this post. Remember to prefer the opens and exports keywords inside module-info.java for sources you control. The Add-Opens/Add-Exports attributes are only intended for forcing open other mods.   What else is new with module support? Previously, the runtime module name was always forced to the first mod ID in your `mods.toml` file and all packages were forced fully open and exported. Module names are now distinguished from mod IDs, meaning the module name in your module-info.java can be different from the mod ID in your `mods.toml`. This allows you to have a more descriptive module name that doesn't have to be the same as your mod ID, however we strongly recommend including your mod ID as part of your module name to aid troubleshooting. The `Automatic-Module-Name` manifest attribute is now also honoured, allowing you to specify a module name for your mod without needing to create a `module-info.java` file. This is particularly useful for mods that don't care about JPMS features but want to have a more descriptive module name and easier integration with other mods that do use JPMS.   How do I use it? The first step is to create a `module-info.java` file in your mod's source directory. This file should be in the same package as your main mod class, and should look something like this: open module com.example.examplemod { requires net.minecraftforge.eventbus; requires net.minecraftforge.fmlcore; requires net.minecraftforge.forge; requires net.minecraftforge.javafmlmod; requires net.minecraftforge.mergetool.api; requires org.slf4j; requires logging; } For now, we're leaving the whole module open to reflection, which is a good starting point. When we know we want to close something off, we can remove the open modifier from the module and open or export individual packages instead. Remember that you need to be open to Forge (module name net.minecraftforge.forge), otherwise it can't call your mod's constructor. Next is fixing modules in Gradle. While Forge and Java support modules properly, Gradle does not put automatic modules on the module path by default, meaning that the logging module (from com.mojang:logging) is not found. To fix this, add the Gradle plugin and add a compile-time module definition for that Mojang library: plugins { // (...) id 'org.gradlex.extra-java-module-info' version "1.9" } // (...) extraJavaModuleInfo { failOnMissingModuleInfo = false automaticModule("com.mojang:logging", "logging") } The automatic module override specified in your build.gradle should match the runtime one to avoid errors. You can do the same for any library or mod dependency that is missing either a module-info or explicit Automatic-Module-Name, however be aware that you may need to update your mod once said library adds one. That's all you need to get started with module support in your mods. You can learn more about modules and how to use them at dev.java.
    • Faire la mise à jour grâce à ce lien m'a aider personnellement, merci à @Paint_Ninja. https://www.amd.com/en/support 
    • When I came across the 'Exit Code: I got a 1 error in my Minecraft mods, so I decided to figure out what was wrong. First, I took a look at the logs. In the mods folder (usually where you'd find logs or crash reports), I found the latest.log file or the corresponding crash report. I read it through carefully, looking for any lines with errors or warnings. Then I checked the Minecraft Forge support site, where you can often find info on what causes errors and how to fix them. I then disabled half of my mods and tried running the game. If the error disappeared, it meant that the problem was with the disabled mod. I repeated this several times to find the problem mod.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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