Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Items inserted by passive interaction ignores importer's setting #308

Closed
AlisonHuang777 opened this issue Nov 5, 2024 · 7 comments
Closed

Comments

@AlisonHuang777
Copy link

AlisonHuang777 commented Nov 5, 2024

Issue type:

  • 🐛 Bug

Short description:

When inserting items with external devices (e.g. hopper), the items will always try to go to the interfaces of which the channel is set to 0 (which is default value), ignoring that of the importer. Also if round-robin is enabled it will also get ignored. Therefore I consider that items, as the title described, will omit the settings of the importer and follow the default behavior.
Currently only tested with item importers/interfaces, but same issue might occur with other variation as well.

Steps to reproduce the problem:

Please watch this footage: https://youtu.be/4jYrVpU2A7c
Using ATM9 0.3.2.

Expected behavior:

Items should only go to interfaces with channel 1 and the amount of them being transferred to each of the barrel should be the same (at least be close).


Versions:

  • Integrated Tunnels (this mod): 1.8.31
  • Integrated Dynamics: 1.23.11
  • Mod loader: Forge 47.3.0
  • Minecraft: 1.20.1

Log file:

no response

@rubensworks
Copy link
Member

Thanks for reporting!

@rubensworks
Copy link
Member

I'm unable to reproduce your problem.
Can you try reproducing the problem without any other mods installed?
If so, could you share a video or a more details step-by-step guide on how to reproduce your problem?

@rubensworks rubensworks moved this from To Do to On hold (awaiting input) in Maintenance Nov 10, 2024
@Jack-McKalling
Copy link
Contributor

Jack-McKalling commented Nov 10, 2024

Did you possibly use a negative value for the Item Interface channel setting?

Or did you use a negative value for the source slot to pull from, instead? (separate question)

@AlisonHuang777 AlisonHuang777 changed the title Passive interaction of importers ignores channel settings Items inserted by passive interaction ignores importer's setting Nov 12, 2024
@AlisonHuang777
Copy link
Author

AlisonHuang777 commented Nov 12, 2024

Sorry for the late update, and sorry again for that there were mistakes in the original description. Therefore I have recorded a footage to showcase the bug more clearly, link in the edited description.

@Jack-McKalling
Copy link
Contributor

Jack-McKalling commented Nov 12, 2024

Ah. So you're using round-robin mode, but that's actually confusing the situation. Try to see if the problem happens without using round-robin, to see what really happens. That setting already deliberately ignores all priority settings according to its tooltip (see CyclopsMC/IntegratedDynamics/issues/1406).

With my own observations, it looks like with the passive interaction enabled, and the hopper pointing into the importer, items are sorted through the incorrect channel 0 as well as the correct one. With the hopper pointing elsewhere and exclusively the importer pulling form it, this will not happen.

However, interestingly, with the passive interaction setting disabled, it still happens! So there must be something wrong with the hopper interaction, maybe overriding the passive interaction setting or just ignoring the channel setting.

New repro steps;

  • place a row of 4 inventories
  • attach item interfaces to the top of each, with a logic cable
  • modify the two on the right to interface channel 1
  • add an importer to the network, with a hopper pointing into it
  • modify the top aspect of the importer to insert into channel 1 as well, and transfer rate 1/t
  • insert a 64 stack of items into the hopper
  • notice that one of the inventories on the left is getting filled by hopper speed (wrong channel), and one on the right at fast speed (correct channel)

@rubensworks
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the additional information @AlisonHuang777 and @Jack-McKalling!

@rubensworks rubensworks moved this from On hold (awaiting input) to To Do in Maintenance Nov 13, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from To Do to Done in Maintenance Nov 19, 2024
@AlisonHuang777
Copy link
Author

Removed the footage on Youtube as this issue has been closed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants