In 540ce08caa, I updated the Item class
to be more explicit about what fields are required, so this test would
fail in a more helpful way, instead of just crashing from `name` being
`nil` when trying to infer the Dyeworks info.
Now, we update the test to use Rails's standard "fixture" system to set
up a more-correct placeholder item, instead!
Catch missing fields in validation before sending it to the DB, and
skip the Dyeworks stuff if the name is missing.
I ran into this looking into `test/trade_activity_test.rb`, which fails
right now because we try to create a boring placeholder item with
minimal fields, which Dyeworks can't call `name.match()` on!
Now, the test fails with a more helpful error about the item being
invalid. Next, I'll fix that!
Just getting this stuff out of Pet, in part because I want to start
being able to unit test modeling, and that will require stubbing out
what this service returns!
Just a bit more clarity of grouping! I'm also thinking about extracting
modeling APIs into a service file like this too, in which case I think
this would help clarify what it is.
They're not all Nostalgic anymore! Oh, how the times have changed!
This way, new ones will appear as "<New?>", until support staff come in
and label them (with our cool new tools!)
Whoops, I didn't realize this change I made to validation for the alt
style editing form, was goofing up alt style modeling!
The trick is, the validation was happening before the `before_create`
hook. Now I've reformulated these as `before_validation` hooks, so
we're not rejecting new alt styles for having no thumbnail!
Oh huh, I guess most of the new items we had when I rewrote this were
Maraquan, and I didn't test enough on standard species-specific items.
Before this change, partially-modeled items for standard pets would
appear as fully modeled, because the presence of the "nonstandard"
color Orange (because of the Orange Chia) meant that the "standard" key
didn't actually have any unique bodies (it was all `["standard", 47]`).
Here, I take my own comments' advice and move away from the standard
label as part of the logic. Instead, we look first for nonstandard
colors with unique bodies, which we'll call out as modelable; and then
check whether there are any basic bodies *not* covered by those special
colors.
That way, compatibility with the Maraquan Acara (a unique body) means
we'll treat Maraquan as a modelable color; and then we'll ignore the
basic bodies, even though it *does* fit the basic Mynci, because there
aren't any compatible basic bodies that aren't *also* Maraquan bodies.
This also means that compatibility with both the Blue Acara and Orange
Acara does *not* preclude a normal item from needing basic pets for
models: because, while Orange is a slightly nonstandard color in the
case of Chia, it doesn't have its own unique body for this item, so we
ignore it when predicting compatibility with basic colors.
This is because labeling poses with the Support tools *should*
invalidate the `PetState.all_supported_poses` cache! But the previous
cache key would only invalidate when a new pet state is *added*, not
when one is *edited*.
This has just been absent for too long! We've lost a lot of data about
when poses were first modeled, which is a shame.
But I want this in now, because I was just doing caching on
/rainbow-pool.json, and realized that _labeling_ poses is another way
pet states can update rather than just being created!
So we need an `updated_at` field, to be able to quickly detect edits
that require us to invalidate the cache on
`PetState.all_supported_poses`. I'll do that next!
This clocks in a bit bigger than what Impress 2020 does in terms of
binary encoding (with gzip it's at 11K instead of 4K), but I'm okay
with that for the simplicity win.
Gonna try to swap this in for where we're still using Impress 2020 for
the species/color picker in the outfit editor!
Before this change, pages that opt in with `use_responsive_design`
would often have the top nav be real cluttered for logged-in users. (I
think I happened to first test this responsive design without being
logged in on my dev box, oops!) Because the home link and `#userbar`
were absolutely positioned on the page, they would frequently overlap.
Here, I stop doing our old tricks to make the top nav load last on the
page. (This was to get "main content" loading faster, which I think is
a. not as relevant today with more commonly faster connections, and b.
was a bit naive to think that it'd be helpful to have to wait a long
time to _navigate_ if a page is unexpectedly large.)
These tricks used to leave some padding at the top of the `#container`,
which these elements would then visually fill via `position: absolute`
once they load.
Next, I update the CSS (for the responsive design pages only) to use
the new `#main-nav` container to lay them out in Flexbox: all in one
row if possible, or wrapped if needed.
Some designs hide stuff like this into a hamburger menu or such when
the screen gets small. I haven't done that here! No specific reason,
I'm just not sold that it's that much better, or worth the trouble.
I tested this on the following combinations:
1. Logged out, homepage
2. Logged in, homepage
3. Logged out, `/items`
4. Logged in, `/items`
5. Logged out, `/items/89487-Dyeworks-Purple-Haunted-Sky-Background`
6. Logged in, `/items/89487-Dyeworks-Purple-Haunted-Sky-Background`
Hope it's solid! 🤞
Before this change, a fully-modeled item (Dyeworks Burgundy: Gown of
the Night) was displaying as still needing the Chia. This was because
looking for "standard" body IDs like this caught up some of the weird
Chia bodies.
I think there's probably something here where we need to like, relabel
certain colors? But honestly, the better version of this logic would
probably be to lean more into the `basic` label in this logic.
But hey, that's a refactor for another time. I gotta go eat!
Noticing a lot of Maraquan items on the homepage today, and they're
doing that thing of expecting standard body types to be relevant too,
because I think we wrote this logic before the Maraquan Mynci ended up
having the same standard Mynci body? (Maybe? Or maybe I'm being
ahistorical and I just wrote this wrong to begin with lol)
In any case, this is more accurate, and I think I'm also maybe
incidentally noticing that it's running faster, at least in my brief
before/after production testing? (There's *more* queries, like 100! But
many of them are *very* fast lookups, coming in at under 1ms—and also a
lot of them are dupes being served by Rails's request-scoped query
cache.)
Huh, I hadn't realized that like, we'd already set up the controller to
always *run* basically all of the modeling logic, and the caching in
the view layer wasn't saving us any queries anymore. Kinda silly!
Remove the caching call, just to simplify the codebase (I like to avoid
caching things that don't specifically need it!).
And hey, love that the modeling code in the controller is now *way*
faster to run! You love to see it!
I have some other changes planned too, but these are some easy ones. I
also turn back on this stuff in development, in hopes that my changes
can make these queries fast enough to not be a big deal anymore!
