tuunaa

I wasn't referring to his signature, I was referring to the fact that the majority of the Minecraft community is populated by children. Even telling someone to "just Google it" would help. I never said he was wrong in telling me that I need to work on my Java. I actually said it was correct. I can also tell he's very smart and knows what he's doing. If he has that kind of personality, that's fine. I told him to do what's best for him. I don't really think the music teacher analogy is the best here, but I do understand what you're saying. The thing is, most teachers will still "shoo away" people in a polite manner. Again, I understand if this is just his personality, there's no problem if this is how he is normally. And after arguing my side once more, I'm going to completely devalue my opinion and say this is gonna be my last post on here. It's started to get more traction than I would have liked, and though everything's been fine so far, I can see this getting out of hand quickly, and it's giving me genuine anxiety. I'd like to thank you all for arguing diesieben07's side in a professional way without going over the top, and you've basically managed to convince me that I was in the wrong from the start. I hope you all have a good day.

So I only just realised you weren't diesieben07. Oops. But you guys get the point right?

I never said it wasn't for my own good. I've been working with Java at a basic level for a few years now, but I guess there are some key things I'm still missing, and I'll work on that before coming back here, don't worry. I'm just saying there are nicer ways of saying that. Again, I don't want to tell you how to do things, I understand you do things for your own reasons, and I understand that the reason you're probably harsh is because you're always dealing with kids on here that have no idea what they're doing and that can get frustrating. You probably want some actually interesting problems to solve, but with how the Minecraft community is filled with young people who don't understand how intense modding actually is, that's virtually impossible. I totally get that, but all I ask is that you at least consider my point of view, though it can seem unrealistic. You don't have to go with it, I'm not going to argue with you until you do. Your analogy makes a lot of sense, but in my experience, it's the really kind and considerate gym teachers -- or just teachers in general, I guess -- who help create inspiration and success in their students. I know you're just a moderator on a forum, and you didn't have to sign a paper saying, "I agree to help inspire as many clueless, annoying children as I can," but it can be really disheartening for a kid to ask for help and get a short "you clearly need to learn more Java before doing this" kind of reply. If these kids were maybe given a little push in the right direction, like to some beginning Java sights, maybe they could go on to make some really great stuff, or even get a well-paying job that they really enjoy in programming. Again, I'm not expecting you to follow this at all. If anything, I'm really just expecting a "yeah, right" reply. But I think the possibility for inspiration and creativity here is astounding, and I think with just a little bit of nurturing it could be increased tenfold. So all I ask is, when someone comes in here with basic Java mistakes, at least provide them with a resource or two for learning better Java. And, one more time, I don't want to tell you hot to do this. So ultimately, do what's best for you, I just want you to consider this.

Just direct them to it. Problem solved.

Well I am thankful that you didn't lock my thread, truly. And I'm sorry, I didn't know not understanding your subjective definition of "basic Java knowledge" was against the rules. I'll try to avoid that next time. I have a question, though. If someone breaks the rules, why don't you link the rules to them? I don't want to tell you how to run your forum, but this is typical moderator practice and I haven't seen you do it once in the past.

I'll be honest, I was genuinely considering going on a rant about how you could really work on being more kind to the people on here instead of immediately getting all hostile towards them, as that makes the Forge forums feel like an extremely unwelcoming place, but I decided it might not be the best idea to risk starting a flame war on my first topic. Nevertheless, you helped fix my main problem. Some other issues came up upon fixing the if statement, but I'm sure I can work those out on my own. So thanks!

I don't know of I don't fully understand what you're trying to say here or if you don't fully understand what I'm trying to do. What I'm doing is only running the destroy code for blocks not on the positions of the north and south blocks relative to the right clicked block. To my knowledge, if I change != to == it would reverse that, instead breaking the blocks north and south and leaving the blocks east and west. This does seem like kind of a dumb mistake to make though, considering the discussion up until this point has shown that that's what I've been trying to do, so I'm going to go ahead and give you the benefit of the doubt and say I'm missing something here. Could you explain what you mean a little more?

I added these prints System.out.println("AND " + (neighborPos != oppPos && neighborPos != facingPos)); System.out.println("OR " + (neighborPos != oppPos || neighborPos != facingPos)); and it's still returning true every time. Oh, and thanks for the tip! I was trying to find a better way to check for crops earlier but I couldn't find anything, so that's super helpful.

Oh! I see what you're saying now. I can't believe I didn't catch that myself! That definitely fixed an issue I would have run into down the road, but there's something else going on here too, because I added both of these prints before the if statement System.out.println(neighborPos != oppPos); System.out.println(neighborPos != facingPos); and both of them return true every time.

I added System.out.printlns for both neighborPos != oppPos and neighborPos != facingPos after all the other prints like so, System.out.println(neighborPos != oppPos); System.out.println(neighborPos != facingPos); and it returned true for every one. I also added a System.out.println for the second parameter I'm comparing neighborPos against (facingPos) and again, you can see where it shouldn't have gone through.

I do want it to return true if either are met though, not if both are met since I'm trying to remove two different blocks at two different coordinates, so I want to check if the block is at one position OR another, not one position AND another. I could have the logic totally wrong though so I'll go ahead and give this a try real quick.

Sorry. Let's go from the start to try and get as much ground covered as we can. What I want to have happen here is when I right click it will destroy the blocks in a 2x3 rectangle as you can see from the work of art I attached here (with the red square being the block right clicked and the white squares being the blocks checked and destroyed). The method I'm using to check for and destroy fully grown crops (posCompare) checks all crops horizontally connected to the right clicked block, like so (again, with the red square being the block right clicked and the white squares being the blocks checked and destroyed). So what I'm trying to do is to make it not check/destroy the blocks north and south of the right clicked block (relative to the diagram, not actual north and south in MineCraft). To do this, I'm using the if statement if (neighborPos != oppPos || neighborPos != facingPos) before running the check/destroy code. Then, when I'm actually calling posCompare, I call it twice: once to check/destroy the row closest to the player and another time to check/compare the further one. The thing is, when I right click with the item it still checks/destroys all the blocks in the + shape, looking like this. When I put in the System.out.printlns you can see just before the if statement, it clearly printed out the matching block positions that shouldn't have gone through, but did anyways, so I know it isn't just that the block positions aren't matching up. Tell me if you need any more context, I'll be glad to give it.

(Note: I somehow managed to put this in the forge gradle subforum and of course now I can't find a single way to delete it, if someone could help me out that'd be neat cause that's embarrassing and I'd like it to not exist) https://pastebin.com/cbq10K42 Here's my class. The issue I'm having is that the if statement if (neighborPos != oppPos || neighborPos != facingPos) in the posCompare method seems to be getting ignored. Here's an example of what the output would be for the System.out.printlns you see in the posCompare method if I was facing north: As you can see, if the if statement in posCompare was followed correctly, the blocks at neighbor positions and shouldn't be broken, but when I right click a crop in game it still does. I also have another issue, being the beetroots won't break properly with this code. This is because when I right click them, even though I'm using ((BlockCrops)block).getMaxAge()) it still wants to check for a max age of 7. I've tried checking for whether it's trying to destroy beetroots specifically and using 3 instead of getting the max age but it still wants to check for 7. Here's the error log:

https://pastebin.com/cbq10K42 Here's my class. The issue I'm having is that the if statement if (neighborPos != oppPos || neighborPos != facingPos) in the posCompare method seems to be getting ignored. Here's an example of what the output would be for the System.out.printlns you see in the posCompare method if I was facing north: As you can see, if the if statement in posCompare was followed correctly, the blocks at neighbor positions and shouldn't be broken, but when I right click a crop in game it still does. I also have another issue, being the beetroots won't break properly with this code. This is because when I right click them, even though I'm using ((BlockCrops)block).getMaxAge()) it still wants to check for a max age of 7. I've tried checking for whether it's trying to destroy beetroots specifically and using 3 instead of getting the max age but it still wants to check for 7. Here's the error log: