Fix additional credit costs not being ignored by :ignore-costs :rez-costs #7216
Conversation
|
Not sure if this is better with the refactor or was better with the |
src/clj/game/core/cost_fns.clj
Outdated
| (get-effects state side :rez-additional-cost card)))) | ||
| ([state side card] (rez-additional-cost-bonus state side card (constantly true))) | ||
| ([state side card pred] | ||
| (filter pred (merge-costs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd prefer (let [costs (merge-costs ...)] (if pred (filterv pred costs) costs)). No need to do extra work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
happy with either, kinda took the first one to be more functional / less having to declare extra state but also think the if does read more straightforward
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel you. Applying a single function to everything is nice. Conditionals make logic harder to follow.
I don't think of items in let bindings as state because they don't persist. Immutable data means we can let bind all we want for free.
src/clj/game/core/rezzing.clj
Outdated
| @@ -26,7 +26,8 @@ | |||
| (= :all-costs ignore-cost) [:credit 0] | |||
| alternative-cost alternative-cost | |||
| :else (let [cost (rez-cost state side card {:cost-bonus cost-bonus}) | |||
| additional-costs (rez-additional-cost-bonus state side card)] | |||
| additional-costs (rez-additional-cost-bonus state side card #(or (nil? ignore-cost) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't like this here. Instead, (when ignore-cost #(= :credit ...)). Along with the change above, no need to check every step.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah ya this is much better and makes sense then for the above to use nil instead of a true function
butzopower
force-pushed
the
tread-lightly-ignore-costs
branch
from
5c5ada4 to
e002551
Compare
Fixes #7214
Fixes #6824