Sort button 2 by Crepestrom · Pull Request #3194 · PixelGuys/Cubyz

Crepestrom · 2026-06-08T19:45:27Z

Sort button now functions as normal

Before sorting it will compress all items into their max stacks and push them all to the lowest index getting rid of any holes

Then the sort button will first seperate items into procederal items and nonprocedural items
then they will be sorted by tag
items that share the same first tag will be internally sorted by their second tag and so on and so forth

Wunka

I still think that std.sort is probably way nicer and easier. Here is an example (not tested) based on your current code (but of course not completly mapped and I with an added getTags method for the Item struct):

pub fn sortItems(source: ClientInventory, ignoredSlotCount: usize) void {
	compressItems(source);
	const ctx: SortContext = .{.inv = source};
	std.sort.insertionContext(ignoredSlotCount, source.super._items.len, ctx);
}

const SortContext = struct {
	inv: ClientInventory,

	pub fn lessThan(ctx: @This(), a: usize, b: usize) bool {
		const itemA = ctx.inv.getItem(a);
		const itemB = ctx.inv.getItem(b);

		if(itemA == .null) return false;
		if(itemB == .null) return true;

		const itemATags = itemA.getTags().?;
		const itemBTags = itemB.getTags().?;

		for(0..@min(itemATags.len, itemBTags.len)) |i| {
			if(itemATags[i] == itemBTags[i]) continue;
			return std.mem.lessThan(u8, itemATags[i].getName(), itemBTags[i].getName());
		}
		if(itemATags.len != itemBTags.len) return itemATags.len < itemBTags.len;

		return std.mem.lessThan(u8, itemA.id().?, itemB.id().?);
	}

	pub fn swap(ctx: @This(), a: usize, b: usize) void {
		main.sync.client.executeCommand(.{.depositOrSwap = .{
			.dest = .{.inv = ctx.inv.super, .slot = @intCast(a)}, 
			.source = .{.inv = ctx.inv.super, .slot = @intCast(b)},
		}});
	}
};

Crepestrom · 2026-06-09T21:16:48Z

also fixes #3195

IntegratedQuantum

About the UI: An icon like this is hard to understand, there is no such thing as a universal sorting icon, and a funnel is often used for filtering.
I think Terraria has a simple and intuitive UI for this:

IntegratedQuantum · 2026-06-11T15:41:10Z

+
+	pub fn compressItems(source: ClientInventory) void {
+		for (source.super._items, 0..) |invStack, slot| {
+			for (source.super._items, 0..) |checkedInvStack, checkedSlot| {


If the item is filled with mostly the same items, this will spawn O(n²) inventory commands. That is excessive.

ok i made it a bit more effecient

Crepestrom · 2026-06-11T16:04:24Z

I still think that std.sort is probably way nicer and easier. Here is an example (not tested) based on your current code (but of course not completly mapped and I with an added getTags method for the Item struct):

pub fn sortItems(source: ClientInventory, ignoredSlotCount: usize) void {
	compressItems(source);
	const ctx: SortContext = .{.inv = source};
	std.sort.insertionContext(ignoredSlotCount, source.super._items.len, ctx);
}

const SortContext = struct {
	inv: ClientInventory,

	pub fn lessThan(ctx: @This(), a: usize, b: usize) bool {
		const itemA = ctx.inv.getItem(a);
		const itemB = ctx.inv.getItem(b);

		if(itemA == .null) return false;
		if(itemB == .null) return true;

		const itemATags = itemA.getTags().?;
		const itemBTags = itemB.getTags().?;

		for(0..@min(itemATags.len, itemBTags.len)) |i| {
			if(itemATags[i] == itemBTags[i]) continue;
			return std.mem.lessThan(u8, itemATags[i].getName(), itemBTags[i].getName());
		}
		if(itemATags.len != itemBTags.len) return itemATags.len < itemBTags.len;

		return std.mem.lessThan(u8, itemA.id().?, itemB.id().?);
	}

	pub fn swap(ctx: @This(), a: usize, b: usize) void {
		main.sync.client.executeCommand(.{.depositOrSwap = .{
			.dest = .{.inv = ctx.inv.super, .slot = @intCast(a)}, 
			.source = .{.inv = ctx.inv.super, .slot = @intCast(b)},
		}});
	}
};

I realized how to turn tags into numbers so I’m gonna try this

Crepestrom · 2026-06-11T21:57:30Z

is ready for rereview

Wunka

Nice. Now the code looks much better

Wunka · 2026-06-12T07:25:24Z

+	pub fn getTagsFromItem(givenItem: Item) []const Tag {
+		if (givenItem == .null) {
+			return &[_]Tag{};
+		} else if (givenItem == .proceduralItem) {
+			return givenItem.proceduralItem.type.tags();
+		} else if (givenItem == .baseItem) {
+			return givenItem.baseItem.tags();
+		} else {
+			std.log.err("getSortingTag: Could not find item class {}", .{givenItem});
+			return &[_]Tag{};
+		}
+	}


This should be in the Item struct and use a switch(self) so you don't need the else at the end

Wunka · 2026-06-12T09:08:16Z

+			for (0..@min(itemATags.len, itemBTags.len)) |i| {
+				if (itemATags[i] == itemBTags[i]) continue;
+				return std.mem.lessThan(u8, itemATags[i].getName(), itemBTags[i].getName());
+			}
+			if (itemATags.len != itemBTags.len) return itemATags.len < itemBTags.len;


this is probably not the best thing (I know it is from me but it was at that time made up on the spot). We probably need to enforce that the tags are sorted so that for example when ItemA has a,b tags and ItemB has c,a,b It gets compared with a,b and a,b,c. Either by sorting them when we load the tags or here. Or some other way.

Definitely on load.

If I do this I think it would cause read order issues if I make it check if the first tag of ItemA exists in ItemB because they could have different orders
I could fix this with forcing them to read based on the enum int value but I like what I have now because it gives control to developers on how items are catogorized and sorted

you could create tags that are used in nothing but sorting so that all flowers are sorted together under the category of cuttable

If I do this I think it would cause read order issues if I make it check if the first tag of ItemA exists in ItemB because they could have different orders I could fix this with forcing them to read based on the enum int value but I like what I have now because it gives control to developers on how items are catogorized and sorted

you could create tags that are used in nothing but sorting so that all flowers are sorted together under the category of cuttable

We didn't mean that. We meant that the tags should be already sorted so what you at the start said doesn't need to be done. This sorting algorithm could then also be changed by a user if they want to.
You just need to add in src/tag.zig

pub fn loadTagsFromZon(_allocator: main.heap.NeverFailingAllocator, zon: main.ZonElement) []Tag { const result = _allocator.alloc(Tag, zon.toSlice().len); for (zon.toSlice(), 0..) |tagZon, i| { result[i] = Tag.find(tagZon.as([]const u8) orelse blk: { std.log.err("Tag array field {s} has incorrect type, expected string", .{@tagName(tagZon)}); break :blk "incorrect"; }); } + // some kind of sorting before returning the result return result; }

I don’t understand what you mean by sorting the tags

Oh I see
You mean so that
C A B
B A C
C B A

all get sorted together A B C
Right?

Oh I see You mean so that C A B B A C C B A

all get sorted together A B C Right?

yes exactly.

No
Id rather give the developer control on sorting rather than enforce is based on the order tags were read into memory
Even if that means mistakes can make sorting look weird

But the sorting of the tags is also clientside. So it can also be changed.

Wunka · 2026-06-12T09:09:22Z

+			}
+			if (itemATags.len != itemBTags.len) return itemATags.len < itemBTags.len;
+
+			return std.mem.lessThan(u8, itemA.id().?, itemB.id().?);


I think it would be nice to add here that proceduralItems are sorted by durability, when even the id is the same.

Crepestrom added 3 commits June 8, 2026 08:58

added button

7a91563

Update Inventory.zig

1bc6472

hmm baseitems dont work

bb2ff56

Crepestrom mentioned this pull request Jun 8, 2026

Sort Button #3184

Closed

Basic Sorting works

96e1ccd

Wunka suggested changes Jun 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

Crepestrom added 3 commits June 9, 2026 13:50

Sorting Finish

9cc3310

formatting

befe81c

sort icon

cc53269

Crepestrom marked this pull request as ready for review June 9, 2026 21:16

Update sort_icon.png

88510ea

Wunka added this to PRs to review Jun 10, 2026

Wunka moved this to Low Priority in PRs to review Jun 10, 2026

IntegratedQuantum requested changes Jun 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

IntegratedQuantum moved this from Low Priority to In review in PRs to review Jun 11, 2026

Crepestrom added 4 commits June 11, 2026 14:38

updated

2c6e489

formatting

d505cba

formatting 2

4721852

formatting 3

d5f8e9a

Crepestrom requested a review from IntegratedQuantum June 11, 2026 21:57

Wunka suggested changes Jun 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Crepestrom added 2 commits June 12, 2026 12:48

durability procedural tool check

1fa83ee

formatting

8e5d0e1

IntegratedQuantum moved this from In review to WIP/not ready for review in PRs to review Jun 12, 2026

Uh oh!

Conversation

Crepestrom commented Jun 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Wunka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Crepestrom commented Jun 9, 2026

Uh oh!

IntegratedQuantum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Crepestrom commented Jun 11, 2026

Uh oh!

Crepestrom commented Jun 11, 2026

Uh oh!

Wunka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Wunka Jun 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Crepestrom commented Jun 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Wunka Jun 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading