Adding WorldEvent.Init to ease instance manipulation

[TheMasterGabriel 29]

I think it would be pretty useful to have a WorldEvent.Init event. It would get called just before the return statement in the init() function in WorldServer and WorldClient. I suggest this because it would make manipulating World instances upon creation a lot easier and more convenient.

 

(Currently, I think the only way to manipulate world instances would be through WorldEvent.Load, but you would need to keep a running list of all the World instances/dimension ids that have loaded to prevent the desired manipulations being applied more than once [since WorldEvent.Load is called in a bunch of different places]. AND, you wouldn't be able to make the list static [since you can have multiple saves and world instances are freshly generated every time you quit and reload a save], so you would need to have some sort of identifier that was saved upon quitting and reloading).

 

Of course, you could manipulate all worlds with ASM/a coremod, but that's not really desirable (as per the hundreds of posts about why someone shouldn't make a coremod).

[Choonster 1602]

As far as I can see,

WorldEvent.Load

is only ever fired once for each

World

instance.

[LexManos 1489]

User was banned for 4 days for his thinly veiled threat to coremod shit if his suggestion isnt taken.

Thinly veiled threats are still threats.

This is not being tolerated anymore.

 

 

On that, as Choonster stated, Load is only called once per instance.

And you need to be more specific of what you mean by 'manipulated'

[SkinnyFats 0]

User was banned for 4 days for his thinly veiled threat to coremod shit if his suggestion isnt taken.

Thinly veiled threats are still threats.

This is not being tolerated anymore.

 

 

On that, as Choonster stated, Load is only called once per instance.

And you need to be more specific of what you mean by 'manipulated'

 

 

May I just say, my statement wasn't a threat. In fact, how you even interpreted it as a personal threat is a mystery to me. I was simply stating "I researched asm stuff before posting and found it discouraged pretty much everywhere someone mentioned it, so there is probably a better alternative to what I'm trying to do." It was an innocent rhetorical statement and had nothing to do with "forcing your hand".

 

Also, I don't know why you are so pessimistic and unnecessarily rude all the time. It isn't really helpful to the people who are just trying to learn the platform you helped create and you don't seem to enjoy it either. You have forums, support systems and tutorials on this website for a reason, so it seems kinda unfair to just push aside everybody who you deem "unworthy" because they aren't professional programmers. Further, if you hate and are willing to ban people for just mentioning asm and coremods, why bother having a wiki tutorial page on them, not to mention having a system in Forge to help people make them? It seems kinda counter intuitive.

 

So sorry if you thought I was threatening you to implement a suggestion, I promise that was not my intention. As for making this new account just to clarify a misunderstanding, I'm sorry for that too, but I wanted to make sure you didn't get the wrong impression.

[LexManos 1489]

Users second account was perma banned for ban evasion.

Coremods are a thing of the past, they only exist in modern minecraft because the community would literally explode if we even tried to remove it. {We've tried} And there is literally no way we CAN remove it because we have to use the mechanics so that Forge itself can work.

Coremods for APIs/Abstraction Layers {Currently, Forge, Sponge, LiteLoader} is FINE.

Coremods for every mod and it's dog is NOT.

 

I dont care what your intentions were, but your statement was a threat.

EVERY person who has ever said that, especially when dealing with things they want in Forge, has intended it as a "If you don't make this change I'll just hack it in with a coremod".

There is literally no other reason to acknowledge that core modding is a option other then to threaten to use it if we don't comply with what you want.

 

Either way, locking thread because this is not needed, The load event does exactly what you need.