1.24's effect on Maps and Spells

[Deuterium]

We're talking about GUI here... that applies to Jass too, but since now there's vJass, then no one would worry.

[PurplePoot]

Originally Posted by Anachron

Never seen a system that actually does that, and all (v)JASS Systems recycle, don't they?

Some GUI "systems" just populate a massive array which they count up in and then go back to 0 (well, 1) when they reach a certain size.

[Anachron]

Originally Posted by PurplePoot

Some GUI "systems" just populate a massive array which they count up in and then go back to 0 (well, 1) when they reach a certain size.

I have never, really never seen anything like this. This is not only crazy, its useless and .. I think you know it. Its buggy as hell. So I agree. Funny, I learn with every day, and if its just how stupid some guys program..

[D4RK_G4ND4LF]

I won't increase the size of my systems by 1 trigger per loop just because of some weird rules oO
nearly all PCs today have 1+ GB Ram so who cares about 1-2 Mb
every stupid virus scanner is taking up this to 50 times

however it is much more important to keep the filesize of the spell low as long as it still runs properly and does not flood the ram until eternity

I wont submit anything as long as I did not do any benchmarks about everything and I will continue spellmaking using the better way not the newer one

and with that many new options it might be possible to hack wc3 again forcing blizzard to make a new patch fixing it and probably messing up all our spells again what would be retarded

well
lets see how things turn out and mess about it later
the thws ppl arn't stupid and will agree with the best solution

[Deuterium]

Originally Posted by D4RK_G4ND4LF

I won't increase the size of my systems by 1 trigger per loop just because of some weird rules oO
nearly all PCs today have 1+ GB Ram so who cares about 1-2 Mb
every stupid virus scanner is taking up this to 50 times

however it is much more important to keep the filesize of the spell low as long as it still runs properly and does not flood the ram until eternity

I wont submit anything as long as I did not do any benchmarks about everything and I will continue spellmaking using the better way not the newer one

and with that many new options it might be possible to hack wc3 again forcing blizzard to make a new patch fixing it and probably messing up all our spells again what would be retarded

well
lets see how things turn out and mess about it later
the thws ppl arn't stupid and will agree with the best solution

Whatever you said doesn't make sense and isn't related to anything we said at all :P

[Rmx]

Whatever you said doesn't make sense and isn't related to anything we said at all :P

Lol a silent flame :P ... well i think what he said is very interesting :D

[Deuterium]

Originally Posted by Rmx

Lol a silent flame :P ... well i think what he said is very interesting :D

Well how can it make sense?

Originally Posted by D4RK_G4ND4LF

I won't increase the size of my systems by 1 trigger per loop just because of some weird rules oO

Why would you increase the size of systems by 1 trigger per loop when there's indexing? (I can take a guess that he's talking about MUI).

Originally Posted by D4RK_G4ND4LF

however it is much more important to keep the filesize of the spell low as long as it still runs properly and does not flood the ram until eternity

How big could the filesize of a spell get? That wouldn't be much of an issue I guess....

Originally Posted by D4RK_G4ND4LF

I wont submit anything as long as I did not do any benchmarks about everything and I will continue spellmaking using the better way not the newer one

No rule prevents whatever better way of making spells, they simply prevent crappy indexing, non-MUI'ness, and buggy GUI.

Originally Posted by D4RK_G4ND4LF

the thws ppl arn't stupid and will agree with the best solution

As I can see, people seem to like the new spell rules which would basically and simply prohibit badly done spells. All well-done spells and the good spell-makers won't be affected in anyway.


So Rmx, do I make sense now? :P

[Rmx]

So Rmx, do I make sense now? :P

uhhh ok ok i was just having fun !

[Deuterium]

Originally Posted by Rmx

uhhh ok ok i was just having fun !

No comment :P

[Gothar_esp]

Does it affect to Arrays? I use gui, does it affect me?

[Deuterium]

Well the rules would affect array's in case their used for "populating indexes"... ie: indexing methods that does not recycle... that's about it.

[Eccho]

There are some new changes it seems, which I wasn't aware of.

Source: http://www.wc3c.net/showpost.php?p=1...&postcount=280

Originally Posted by HindyHat

And some things I've noticed so far:
- Added GetSpellTargetX and GetSpellTargetY
- HaveSavedX now works for all types
- Added the agent type and its hashtable natives
- Did NOT fix the return bug workaround
- Did NOT add code arrays

Possibly some more, but I haven't seen anything.

This is pretty old I know now (dont kill me for it)...

There is a SaveAgentHandle, which is a child of a handle
The handles which were ref-counted before, is now called agents.
Agents extends handles

[RiPiG]

OMG My JNGP doesn't work....! >:( Duciplate Error!!!

[cHeRoL]

My triggers are not working.
I can't enable them.
What shall I do?