party should come before players name #2043

New Issue

flux · 2022-06-07T15:56:58Z

flux commented

2022-06-07 15:56:58 +00:00

e.g. [morlock] flux instead of flux [morlock]

e.g. `[morlock] flux` instead of `flux [morlock]`

flux added the

1. kind/bug

label 2022-06-07 15:56:58 +00:00

flux self-assigned this 2022-06-07 15:57:08 +00:00

flux commented

2022-06-13 03:28:54 +00:00

@AliasAlreadyTaken

Fixed in 8953062ed5

You'll have to set name_monoid.invert_composition = true in minetest.conf

@AliasAlreadyTaken Fixed in https://github.com/fluxionary/minetest-name_monoid/commit/8953062ed548a76d7e5bde1ca0bdf05349af4015 You'll have to set `name_monoid.invert_composition = true` in minetest.conf

flux added the

3. source/mod upstream

4. step/ready to QA test

labels 2022-06-13 03:29:13 +00:00

AliasAlreadyTaken commented

2022-06-16 01:25:17 +00:00

Done. Will be life with the next update.

Seems like I fail to understand the monoid approach. I thought you declare the monoid the master and everything else must use it, while the monoid is agnostic to WHAT it is used by. Seems like the monoid knows about what it is supposed to do?

Done. Will be life with the next update. Seems like I fail to understand the monoid approach. I thought you declare the monoid the master and everything else must *use* it, while the monoid is agnostic to WHAT it is used by. Seems like the monoid knows about what it is supposed to do?

AliasAlreadyTaken added this to the 1.1.113 milestone 2022-06-16 01:25:21 +00:00

flux commented

2022-06-16 02:12:56 +00:00

Done. Will be life with the next update.

Seems like I fail to understand the monoid approach. I thought you declare the monoid the master and everything else must use it, while the monoid is agnostic to WHAT it is used by. Seems like the monoid knows about what it is supposed to do?

if the ordering of the composition matters, the monoid must have some information about this. technically, this makes the composition operator more restrictive than a generic monoid, but the purpose is to allow multiple mechanisms to affect a single value without being aware of each other, and that is still upheld.

also, the name monoid basically implements the idea of "multiplication by zero", because we want to make the entire nametag disappear sometimes.

> Done. Will be life with the next update. > > Seems like I fail to understand the monoid approach. I thought you declare the monoid the master and everything else must *use* it, while the monoid is agnostic to WHAT it is used by. Seems like the monoid knows about what it is supposed to do? if the ordering of the composition matters, the monoid must have some information about this. technically, this makes the composition operator more restrictive than a generic monoid, but the purpose is to allow multiple mechanisms to affect a single value without being aware of each other, and that is still upheld. also, the name monoid basically implements the idea of "multiplication by zero", because we want to make the entire nametag disappear sometimes.

flux added

5. result/fixed

and removed

4. step/ready to QA test

labels 2022-06-22 15:53:39 +00:00

flux commented

2022-06-22 15:54:26 +00:00

live

flux closed this issue

2022-06-22 15:54:26 +00:00

flux referenced this issue

2022-08-31 18:04:13 +00:00