Initial support for modular configurations #20576
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We will eventually need to update the rendered traits, support actually swapping configs in npc attacks, better communicate that an empty list of modular configs is BPS, and support passing modular configs into the item alteration. We may also need a migration for the current selection maybe.
I'm using a pruned schema field for the trait config currently, but I'm suspecting to support adding new annotatable traits in modules we may need TraitConfigField to instead accept a config object to generate the actual schema instead of being hardcoded. Hardcoded is likely fine for current development.