• Listen to a special audio message from Bill Roper to the Hive Workshop community (Bill is a former Vice President of Blizzard Entertainment, Producer, Designer, Musician, Voice Actor) 🔗Click here to hear his message!
  • Read Evilhog's interview with Gregory Alper, the original composer of the music for WarCraft: Orcs & Humans 🔗Click here to read the full interview.

1.24's effect on Maps and Spells

Status
Not open for further replies.
Level 24
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
3,563
i am to lazy now to go check all this GUI algorithms since i dont like GUI but i dont hate it as well.

Algorithms are not specific to the language/wrapper for language.

so what i am trying to say is this: both vJass and cJass are unreadable if they are in such a coder hands...

Well . . . duh.

Anyway, discussion is pointless here. It may have convinced me to steal vJass's algorithm and port it to teh GUIz, but I'm lazy so only a 50% chance I do anything. :p
 
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..
 
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
 
Level 17
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
1,350
D4RK_G4ND4LF said:
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
 
Level 17
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
1,350
Rmx said:
Lol a silent flame :p ... well i think what he said is very interesting :D
Well how can it make sense?

D4RK_G4ND4LF said:
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).

D4RK_G4ND4LF said:
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....

D4RK_G4ND4LF said:
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.

D4RK_G4ND4LF said:
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
 
Level 23
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
2,482
There are some new changes it seems, which I wasn't aware of.

Source: http://www.wc3c.net/showpost.php?p=1090901&postcount=280
HindyHat said:
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
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top