Skip to content

Expose block selection shapes in the data API - #468

Open
Pix3lPirat3 wants to merge 1 commit into
PrismarineJS:masterfrom
Pix3lPirat3:feat/block-selection-shapes
Open

Pix3lPirat3 wants to merge 1 commit into
PrismarineJS:masterfrom
Pix3lPirat3:feat/block-selection-shapes

Conversation

@Pix3lPirat3

@Pix3lPirat3 Pix3lPirat3 commented Sep 13, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Expose optional blockSelectionShapes through the indexed API and generated TypeScript declarations. Keep collision data separate and preserve absence for versions without selection data. Depends on the new minecraft-data schema and datasets.

Related PRs:

Expose optional blockSelectionShapes through the indexed API and generated TypeScript declarations. Keep collision data separate and preserve absence for versions without selection data. Depends on the new minecraft-data schema and datasets.

@rom1504 rom1504 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Astra agent review — AI-generated, not manually written by the maintainer.

No new code blocker found with the companion data installed. I generated this candidate wrapper/types using minecraft-data #1296, ran the two added loader tests and the existing TypeScript check, then exercised its output through prismarine-registry and candidate prismarine-block #125 across all 28 registered versions. Selection and collision datasets remain separate, and absent selection data stays undefined.

Landing/publishing is conditional on updating the data submodule to include the schema and datasets from #1296; the generator produces the new declaration from that schema. I tested this candidate combination explicitly, not the current released wrapper.

Skills used: prismarine-protocol-data-review traced dataPaths, generated data.js, schema-derived types and release ownership; prismarine-architecture-review checked the optional API and registry propagation; prismarine-review separated conditional integration readiness from code correctness.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants