mirror of
https://github.com/Bubberstation/Bubberstation.git
synced 2025-12-10 09:42:29 +00:00
66d070a586
We shouldn't really be invoking the proc itself because then we don't pass along the failing line/file to our consumers, let's use the macro in all instances that really need it. I noticed people were invoking the `Fail()` proc directly rather than using `TEST_FAIL` instead, so they weren't getting those neat annotations on their failing code because we never passed along the failing line/file to actually apply those annotations. That's silly. We don't even return on `TEST_FAIL` either, so there's no reason to not do this (only upsides wahoo).
33 lines
1.1 KiB
Plaintext
33 lines
1.1 KiB
Plaintext
/**
|
|
* Validates that all spells have a different name.
|
|
*
|
|
* Spell names are used for debugging in some places
|
|
* as well as an option for admins giving out spells,
|
|
* so every spell should have a distinct name.
|
|
*
|
|
* If you're making a subtype with only one or two big changes,
|
|
* consider adding an adjective to the name.
|
|
*
|
|
* "Lesser Fireball" for a subtype of Fireball with a shorter cooldown.
|
|
* "Deadly Magic Missile" for a subtype of Magic Missile that does damage, etc.
|
|
*/
|
|
/datum/unit_test/spell_names
|
|
|
|
/datum/unit_test/spell_names/Run()
|
|
|
|
var/list/types_to_test = typesof(/datum/action/cooldown/spell)
|
|
|
|
var/list/existing_names = list()
|
|
for(var/datum/action/cooldown/spell/spell_type as anything in types_to_test)
|
|
var/spell_name = initial(spell_type.name)
|
|
if(spell_name == "Spell")
|
|
continue
|
|
|
|
if(spell_name in existing_names)
|
|
TEST_FAIL("Spell: [spell_name] ([spell_type]) had a name identical to another spell. \
|
|
This can cause confusion for admins giving out spells, and while debugging. \
|
|
Consider giving the name an adjective if it's a subtype. (\"Greater\", \"Lesser\", \"Deadly\".)")
|
|
continue
|
|
|
|
existing_names += spell_name
|