Java takes OO to heart, so when you see that you're passing around (x,y,z) a lot, you're probably also doing a lot of similar things with (x,y,z) inside your me

Java takes OO to heart, so when you see that you're passing around (x,y,z) a lot, you're probably also doing a lot of similar things with (x,y,z) inside your method definitions. The OO answer to this is to wrap (x,y,z) in a class; in this case BlockPos. We haven't seen enough of the code to really say whether any of this is even remotely sane, but we can say that creating tons of immutable objects that are temporary and short-lived is going to have a performance impact. So at best, this sounds like an enhancement to API utility involving a trade-off against performance, and at worst incompetent programming. I'm betting on the former, only the performance trade-off may have been more severe than anticipated. It's also worth keeping in mind that this is probably a "death by a thousand cuts" scenario where this specific case isn't the root cause of the entire performance problem, but one of the contributors.