Allow the "ANY" wildcard in the "set inserter stack size" inserter circuit setting.

Post your ideas and suggestions how to improve the game.

Moderator: ickputzdirwech

Post Reply
User avatar
tzwaan
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2016 12:12 am
Contact:

Allow the "ANY" wildcard in the "set inserter stack size" inserter circuit setting.

Post by tzwaan »

Found this suggestion originally in this thread, but since that original suggestion was already implemented, this should receive its own thread.
TL;DR
Allow the stack size of inserters to be set via the circuit network using the "ANY" wildcard instead of specifying a specific signal, which would allow setting both the filter and the stack size using a single signal.

What ?
Recently the "ANY" wildcard was added as an output to the decider combinator, allowing us to get a single signal from a full frame of signals.
Used in this way, the wildcard has the same behavior as the "set filter" operation on filter inserters (assuming a single slot).
However, setting the stack size of that same inserter can currently only be done through a single fixed signal.

I suggest allowing the "ANY" wildcard to be used to set the inserter stack size. It would then pick the signal it uses in the same way as the other uses of the "ANY" output wildcard.

By doing this we can specify both a filter as well as the stack size using a single signal.

In the case of a filter inserter with multiple filter slots, there is an implementation choice to be made.
1 - The consistent behavior with the other uses of ANY would be to always pick the stack size of the item that would be selected by ANY, even if the item the inserter is picking up is from a latter filter slot.
2 - The choice could be made to base the stack size on the actual item that the inserter is picking up, so it always matches the right signal even when multiple filters are set.

I would personally go with option 1 for internal consistency (and probably also ease of implementation).
Why ?
There are currently many combinator applications where we want to set both the filter and the stack size based on certain conditions. This change would allow us to combine the filter and stack size signals into 1, allowing us to have a full configuration of filter/size combinations in a single frame of signals.
On top of that, this change does not impact current existing behaviors, so it would not break anything.

User avatar
ssilk
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 10:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Allow the "ANY" wildcard in the "set inserter stack size" inserter circuit setting.

Post by ssilk »

This is quite similar
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=62189 "Each" Signal Choice as Stack Size Control Signal

I would like to explain me the difference between both. :)
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...

Nidan
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 1:40 am
Contact:

Re: Allow the "ANY" wildcard in the "set inserter stack size" inserter circuit setting.

Post by Nidan »

Each != Any, obviously ;)

The "each" suggestion would solve OP's problem, since, if I understood OP correctly, there would only be one signal on the wire. But the same can already be accomplished by adding an arithmetic "each + 0 -> S" (or any other virtual signal) between the decider and the inserter.

User avatar
ssilk
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 10:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Allow the "ANY" wildcard in the "set inserter stack size" inserter circuit setting.

Post by ssilk »

Thanks.
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...

User avatar
NotRexButCaesar
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:47 am
Contact:

Re: Allow the "ANY" wildcard in the "set inserter stack size" inserter circuit setting.

Post by NotRexButCaesar »

Nidan wrote:
Tue Apr 27, 2021 8:28 am
But the same can already be accomplished by adding an arithmetic "each + 0 -> S" (or any other virtual signal) between the decider and the inserter.
Not exactly. That will add a one tick delay. You need an additional each + 0 combinator to make sure the signal and stack size concur.
: Alea jacta est. Determine what you intend to accomplish with an action before execution.
Have you ever heard the gospel? Most have not.

Post Reply

Return to “Ideas and Suggestions”