feat: allow to rotate items in the InventoryHud

[stefaniamak]

Associated PR: Terasology/LightAndShadow#123

Result

Quickslot item selection changes completely. The active item is now stable, while the inventory items at the quickslot rotate within it in a ring-like style.

Changes

The main head behind the changes is @skaldarnar, who gave me the steps on how to implement this method.

• Added the boolean variable rotateItems to set which quickslot version you want
• Added the class TargetSlotBinding which provides the above result

If you want the correct format and order of the inventory items, please run the test alongside Terasology/LightAndShadow#123.

Shortcut file

Not sure this file was created automatically, or by mistake from me. I committed it in case it was automatically created, so to prevent failed tests.

How to test

• Start a game within Terasology (both new or old save is fine)
• Fill up your quickslot with at least 2 items
• Scroll up and down

Test UI screenshot

Left image: selected item A at the bottom
Right image: quickslot after scrolling once downwards; previously selected item A went at the top, and the selected item became the one which was above the previously selected item A.

Note: Below format is done by Terasology/LightAndShadow#123. If you run tests without that PR, the selected inventory item would be the top inventory item from quickslot, and the scrolling rotation will be inverted.

[jdrueckert]

Still need to test in-game.

[jdrueckert]

is that still required? if not please remove

[stefaniamak]

TargetSlotBinding gives an error if it has no getter, but are you referring to the code inside the getter instead of the getter itself? If yes, I should look more into it because that code was suggested by skaldarnar, who looked into the binding.

[stefaniamak]

Okay after looking a bit into this, I believe it is needed because one might not need the new kind of quickslot mode. I did try to remove parts I thought might be unuseful, but kept getting an error message each time. I shall tag @skaldarnar to give a second opinion.

[skaldarnar]

To avoid the empty set method instead of implementing the base interface Binding you can extend the abstract class ReadOnlyBinding - which only requires to implement the get method.
The setter is just empty in that abstract class, i.e., it's exactly the same logic 😉