[MC-103403] Recipes for 9 items to make a block actually have 81 items internally

There is a class (net.minecraft.item.crafting.RecipesIngots) which creates recipes for the gold block, iron block, etc. and the reverse recipes like one gold block equals 9 gold ingots and so on.

The array storing the combinations is for the reverse recipes and therefor uses for the ingots a count of 9. The problem is that it uses the same ingredients to create the recipe for the block and therefor each item in the block recipe has a count of 9 resulting in 9 * 9 required items. This cannot be seen in vanilla gameplay because the method net.minecraft.item.crafting.ShapedRecipes.checkMatch(InventoryCrafting, int, int, boolean) currently only checks item and meta data but not count. However, it will very likely cause problems in the future when this is changed and already causes problems for mods which display crafting recipes.

This could be fixed by having the method net.minecraft.item.crafting.RecipesIngots.addRecipes(CraftingManager) make a copy of the ingot and set its count to 1 when adding the block recipes.

Comments 20

[Bot] Arisa 2016-06-10T10:52:59Z

Please do not mark unreleased versions as affected.
You don't have access to them yet.

Juha Kankare 2016-06-10T14:07:24Z

This bot is an idiot since everybody has access to the unreleased versions trough prereleases or snapshots.

user-f2760 2016-06-10T14:08:20Z

No, how can you access a unreleased version aka, one you cannot play.

Danny N 2016-06-10T15:38:10Z

FVbico, has Arisa ever told one of the dev that message when they work on an update or has it been programmed to ignore the devs?

user-f2760 2016-06-10T17:03:33Z

No, because Devs don't report bugs.

You selected "Future Version 1.10.1+", 1.10.1 doesn't exist yet, only the devs have it, you don't, what you have is 1.10, not 1.10.1. You cannot mark unreleased versions as affected on this tracker. That's it. End of the line.

10 more comments

mezz 2016-06-10T17:58:19Z

I selected it, which was a mistake.
I'm not sure why other people are arguing about it.
Thanks FVbico.

Danny N 2016-06-10T18:15:21Z

so out of interest when the dev finds a bug how do they track that?
EDIT: Thanks for answering the question 🙂 and I also wasn't auguring about the future version thing, just had a question that popped in to my mine and I had to ask - sorry about any confusion

wobst.michael 2016-11-02T19:14:11Z

Is this still an issue in the most recent versions (currently that is 1.10.2, or 16w43a) of Minecraft? If so, please update the affected versions and help us keeping this ticket updated from time to time. If you are the owner/reporter of this ticket, you can modify the affected version(s) yourself.

mezz 2016-11-02T20:13:09Z

I confirmed this is still an issue in 1.10.2, but I cannot check snapshots because Forge is only available for release versions. Is that ok?

[Mod] Neko 2016-11-02T20:15:00Z

This site is for addressing issues related to the base unmodded Minecraft; Bukkit, Spigot, Forge, Optifine, or any other modded system invalidates your ticket.

mezz 2016-11-02T20:17:11Z

I am only using Forge to look at the code in a convenient way, this issue exists in vanilla.

[Mod] Neko 2016-11-02T20:18:22Z

Forge code is not the same as Minecraft code.

mezz 2016-11-02T20:23:16Z

I contribute code to Forge. It does not edit this class, this is a vanilla issue.

mezz 2016-11-02T20:42:01Z

Here is the obfuscated code from the 16w43a jar, confirming the bug without Forge.

ahj.java

public class ahj
{
    private final Object[][] a;
    
    public ahj() {
        this.a = new Object[][] { { alq.R, new aff(afh.n, 9) }, { alq.S, new aff(afh.m, 9) }, { alq.ah, new aff(afh.l, 9) }, { alq.bT, new aff(afh.bZ, 9) }, { alq.y, new aff(afh.be, 9, aei.l.b()) }, { alq.cn, new aff(afh.aF, 9) }, { alq.cA, new aff(afh.k, 9, 0) }, { alq.cx, new aff(afh.R, 9) }, { alq.cE, new aff(afh.aU, 9) } };
    }
    
    public void a(final ahl \u2603) {
        for (final Object[] array : this.a) {
            final alp \u26032 = (alp)array[0];
            final aff \u26033 = (aff)array[1];
            \u2603.a(new aff(\u26032), "###", "###", "###", '#', \u26033);
            \u2603.a(\u26033, "#", '#', \u26032);
        }
        \u2603.a(new aff(afh.n), "###", "###", "###", '#', afh.bF);
        \u2603.a(new aff(afh.bF, 9), "#", '#', afh.n);
    }
}

mezz 2016-11-02T20:46:47Z

Sorry for the edits, I initially confirmed with 16w42a instead of 16w43a.

mezz 2016-11-03T17:41:41Z

Confirmed in 16w44a

ahl.class

public class ahl
{
    private final Object[][] a;
    
    public ahl() {
        this.a = new Object[][] { { als.R, new afh(afj.n, 9) }, { als.S, new afh(afj.m, 9) }, { als.ah, new afh(afj.l, 9) }, { als.bT, new afh(afj.bZ, 9) }, { als.y, new afh(afj.be, 9, aek.l.b()) }, { als.cn, new afh(afj.aF, 9) }, { als.cA, new afh(afj.k, 9, 0) }, { als.cx, new afh(afj.R, 9) }, { als.cE, new afh(afj.aU, 9) } };
    }
    
    public void a(final ahn \u2603) {
        for (final Object[] array : this.a) {
            final alr \u26032 = (alr)array[0];
            final afh \u26033 = (afh)array[1];
            \u2603.a(new afh(\u26032), "###", "###", "###", '#', \u26033);
            \u2603.a(\u26033, "#", '#', \u26032);
        }
        \u2603.a(new afh(afj.n), "###", "###", "###", '#', afj.bF);
        \u2603.a(new afh(afj.bF, 9), "#", '#', afj.n);
    }
}

marcono1234 2017-01-18T00:38:56Z

Changed confirmation status to "Confirmed" because I can confirm that with MCP

marcono1234 2017-01-18T00:50:21Z

Changed the description to explain the reason and a possible fix.

user-f2760 2017-09-12T08:12:01Z

Is this still the case in 1.12 with data driven recipes?

mezz 2017-09-13T02:42:00Z

This was fixed in 1.12 during the move to data driven recipes.