Assume beam and shockwave creation is fallible #7174
+2
−3
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
Baezon
added
fix
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
"why didn't it fire?" Because object creation should always be assumed fallible, the designer can throw a million things around; there may be not slots available despite the code's best efforts.
Nothing cares about
shockwave_create's return, and only the single spot which was edited cares aboutbeam_fire_targeting()'s return, so the relevant Int3's were removed. In both cases the problem is logged if the designer/coder wants to investigate further, but it's no reason to bring debug builds to a halt.Other object creations, such as ships, are assumed infallible but it would be a larger effort to ensure the rest of the code is properly prepared for its fallibility.