Assuming implementation details don't match the contract is no.
This commit is contained in:
parent
4e593fdd8c
commit
e0ffcaa98d
1 changed files with 2 additions and 6 deletions
|
@ -348,12 +348,8 @@ public class BlockRift extends Block implements ITileEntityProvider
|
|||
// may have low hardness to make them easier to build with. However, block.getExplosionResistance()
|
||||
// is designed to receive an entity, the source of the blast. We have no entity so
|
||||
// I've set this to access blockResistance directly. Might need changing later.
|
||||
|
||||
//notabadminer: block.getExplosionResistance() doesn't do anything with the entity passed to it
|
||||
//so passing null is fine. Just do it. Also, it returns resistance/5 so we should *5 to get
|
||||
//back to the resistance value.
|
||||
|
||||
return (block.getExplosionResistance(null) * 5 >= MIN_IMMUNE_RESISTANCE ||
|
||||
|
||||
return (block.blockResistance >= MIN_IMMUNE_RESISTANCE ||
|
||||
modBlocksImmuneToRift.contains(block) ||
|
||||
blocksImmuneToRift.contains(block));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue