Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Removed strategy brainfuck and turned it into a more proper solution. #37

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 5, 2023

Conversation

Metaphoriker
Copy link
Owner

Long story short: PathingRuleSet nolonger maintains the PathfinderStrategy. It is now passed via the Pathfinder.findPath method. With this change we grant the Pathfinder and -strategies more flexibility

Long story short: PathingRuleSet nolonger maintains the PathfinderStrategy. It is now passed via the Pathfinder.findPath method. With this change we grant the Pathfinder and -strategies more flexibility
@olijeffers0n
Copy link
Contributor

I had a look through... So I thought that the thought process before was to avoid having the user creating a tonne of throwaway strategy objects. Also, if the contact with the user is the expectation that each path find will have a new strategy, why is it that it defaults to a common instance. I suppose that it doesn't really matter for direct.

@Metaphoriker Metaphoriker merged commit 2dd79f8 into trunk Oct 5, 2023
5 checks passed
@Metaphoriker Metaphoriker deleted the strategy-overwork branch October 5, 2023 13:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
api enhancement New feature or request internal
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants