Refactor JEI description, add support for fluids by Wizzerinus · Pull Request #382 · CleanroomMC/GroovyScript

Wizzerinus · 2026-04-11T22:53:27Z

Allows using fluid(...) in mods.jei.description, which also fixes a startup crash when the code does that

This should support adding more types fairly easily

lmk if this is a bad approach, I was kinda very focused on keeping it a VirtualizedRegistry, and its probably not the cleanest way

WaitingIdly · 2026-04-11T22:55:01Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

-                    VanillaTypes.ITEM,
-                    entry.getRight().toArray(new String[0]));
+        for (DescriptionEntry<?> entry : this.getScriptedRecipes()) {
+            System.out.println("adding entry: " + entry);


WaitingIdly · 2026-04-11T22:55:47Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

-                for (Pair<List<IIngredient>, List<String>> entry : this.getBackupRecipes()) {
-                    if (entry.getKey()
+                for (DescriptionEntry<?> entry : this.getBackupRecipes()) {
+                    System.out.println("removing entry: " + entry);


1 am coding ❤️

WaitingIdly · 2026-04-11T22:59:20Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

    @MethodDescription(type = MethodDescription.Type.ADDITION)
-    public void add(List<IIngredient> target, List<String> description) {
-        addScripted(Pair.of(target, description));
+    public void add(IIngredient[] target, String... description) {


maybe do Object[] target + get the IIngredientRegistry#getIngredientType later on + check that everything has the same ingredient type. wouldnt use IIngredient or FluidStack anymore

Hmm, we could do that I guess, that would be much better in terms of future flexibility too

Why is this changed to array? Lists are much nicer in groovy.

WaitingIdly · 2026-04-11T23:03:19Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

+    }
+
+    private boolean compareObjects(Object inEntry, Object inRegistry) {
+        if (inEntry instanceof ItemStack ieStack) {


since this happens only in applyRemovals, we can compare using IIngredientHelper#getUniqueId - perhaps IngredientUtil#equal? although i think that might be intended for internal logic.

The problem is sometimes you need to remove description from an item with a specific NBT, which checking only the ID doesn't. I wanted to keep the old logic in regards to this. Though I don't really like how this turned out, yeah

See my comment on applyAdditions

WaitingIdly · 2026-04-11T23:04:36Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

-                    entry.getRight().toArray(new String[0]));
+        for (DescriptionEntry<?> entry : this.getScriptedRecipes()) {
+            System.out.println("adding entry: " + entry);
+            if (entry.representative instanceof ItemStack) {


would suggest ensuring everything is the same IIngredientRegistry#getIngredientType + registering via that (casting as needed. shouldnt need an instanceof then

This is not possible due to a Java quirk, that I have already outlined in the Discord channel. The JEI API exposes an overloaded function like this:

<T> void addIngredientInfo(T ingredient, IIngredientType<T> ingredientType, String... descriptionKeys); <T> void addIngredientInfo(List<T> ingredients, IIngredientType<T> ingredientType, String... descriptionKeys);

If T := Object is substituted (or T being an existential type, which eventually reduces to Object), then these two methods are ambiguous, so T must be a concrete type, hence this is necessary.

WaitingIdly · 2026-04-11T23:05:10Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

-public class Description extends VirtualizedRegistry<Pair<List<IIngredient>, List<String>>> {
+public class Description extends VirtualizedRegistry<Description.DescriptionEntry<?>> {
+
+    static class DescriptionEntry<T> {


think this needs public

As of right now it's only used within the class, any reason why?

part of the signature, Description extends VirtualizedRegistry<Description.DescriptionEntry<?>>

is this for consistency reasons? it works fine as is, but if its for consistency idm fixing

brachy84 · 2026-04-14T10:08:06Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

    @MethodDescription(type = MethodDescription.Type.ADDITION)
-    public void add(List<IIngredient> target, List<String> description) {
-        addScripted(Pair.of(target, description));
+    public void add(IIngredient[] target, String... description) {


Why is this changed to array? Lists are much nicer in groovy.

brachy84 · 2026-04-14T10:08:30Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

    @MethodDescription(type = MethodDescription.Type.ADDITION)
-    public void add(List<IIngredient> target, String... description) {
-        addScripted(Pair.of(target, Arrays.asList(description)));
+    public void add(IIngredient[] target, List<String> description) {


because then we cannot overload based on the input type, as all lists cast down to List<?> on the JVM, and we need to apply different code depending on FluidStack, an IIngredient that is not FluidStack, or another type (the latter is currently not supported in JEI so idk an example for that). We could disambiguate manually though. Idk, these group methods are very uncommon I believe (since for IIngredient you can just use an OrIngredient), so it's hard to tell whether the manual overloading will be worth in the long run.

brachy84 · 2026-04-14T10:10:35Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

+    }
+
+    @MethodDescription(type = MethodDescription.Type.ADDITION)
+    public void add(Object[] target, String... description) {


List > array

brachy84 · 2026-04-14T10:10:38Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

+    }
+
+    @MethodDescription(type = MethodDescription.Type.ADDITION)
+    public void add(Object[] target, List<String> description) {


List > array

not possible due to type erasure

brachy84 · 2026-04-14T10:10:50Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

+    // This overload set is the same as Object one. It exists because FluidStack implements IIngredient, but does not have any matching stacks,
+    // which causes a JEI startup crash when trying to add that description
+    @MethodDescription(type = MethodDescription.Type.ADDITION)
+    public void add(FluidStack[] target, String... description) {


List > array

brachy84 · 2026-04-14T10:10:53Z

src/main/java/com/cleanroommc/groovyscript/compat/mods/jei/Description.java

+    }
+
+    @MethodDescription(type = MethodDescription.Type.ADDITION)
+    public void add(FluidStack[] target, List<String> description) {


List > array

Add support for fluids in JEI description

9f94b4c

WaitingIdly requested changes Apr 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

Wizzerinus added 2 commits April 12, 2026 12:52

remove prints

bebadea

generics

53b5d53

brachy84 requested changes Apr 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

Conversation

Wizzerinus commented Apr 11, 2026

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!

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!

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!

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!

3 participants