The following block states do not occlude light event though, they are fully opaque (which is contrary to the expectation):
[media]Trapdoors:
spruce, birch, dark oak
Doors:
spruce, birch, dark oak, mangrove, warped, crimson
as well as all lower halves except acacia and cherry (cherry only due to two texels)
Resolution:
According to my own untested analysis (off mojang+yarn-spigot deobfuscated server code), this issue should be resolved, by not calling .noOcclusion() on the specified trapdoors and doors in the Blocks class,
as well as adding:
```public boolean useShapeForLightOcclusion(BlockState state)
{ return true; }
```
to the DoorBlock and TrapDoorBlock classes.
Additionally (at least for the doors that need only one half corrected)
```public VoxelShape getOcclusionShape(BlockState state, BlockGetter world, BlockPos pos);```
has to be overwritten to return Shapes.empty() if the half includes transparency.
Linked issues
Attachments
Comments
migrated
migrated
As for this being a duplicate of Duplicate of MC-139435, WAI.
It technically is, but I would still like this to be re accessed, since I do not understand, why a closed door (like in the screenshot) should not allow me to darken my room. I mean do I seriously have to use a piston door, just so that my dark room can have a door? Does not that harm creativity?
Why Hopper (Top) and Cauldron (Top) as specified in MC-139435 should not block light is also a mystery to me. I guess for the hopper you could argue, that it has a hole, but what about the cauldron?
Brain81505
Or Dupe of MC-82773?
migrated
Reassessment is not done via a new report, you leave a comment on the original requesting review.
And the reason for this is simple: consistency among same-type blocks. As for hopper and cauldron, no idea.
Brain, technically that's a wrongfully closed report (mod action based on wiki article), while the report I linked is a mojang WAI.
migrated
I am sorry for not following proper procedure then. Also I failed to check for closed tickets involving this issue, which was, because I cloud not image this (in my humble opinion) obvious mismatch of designers intent and the lighting behaviour to be intentional.
I agree that the door part of this duplicates MC-82773 WAI and the Trapdors and Doors are included in MC-139435 WAI and therefore this ticket should be closed as a duplicate,
but why is this behaviour intentional? I mean the (Trap-)Doors are intentionally opaque! There are multiple other transparent (Trap-)Doors, so it clearly was a design decision to include opaque options in the game. That however means, that these (since they are opaque) should also block light. That seems only natural.
Duplicate of MC-139435, WAI.