• 🏆 Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Contestants must re-texture a SD unit model found in-game (Warcraft 3 Classic), recreating the unit into a peaceful NPC version. 🔗Click here to enter!
  • It's time for the first HD Modeling Contest of 2024. Join the theme discussion for Hive's HD Modeling Contest #6! Click here to post your idea!

Suggest JASS, vJASS, and cJASS sections

Status
Not open for further replies.
Level 31
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,306
1. cJASS is an approved tool, but THW's stance to my knowledge is that you cannot submit plain cJASS resources. THW needs to make their stance clear =P. If THW's stance is that you can submit plain cJASS resources now, then disregard the following and let us all know with an announcement. If you plan to keep requiring vJASS when submitting cJASS, then please read the rest of this post.

I suggest you split them up into 3 sections so that we don't have to keep saying this requires this and that. It'll also make cJASS people happier as they won't have to keep writing in vJASS. I'm a cJASS person that hates writing vJASS ^_^.

Either that, or let people submit plain old cJASS resources in the current JASS section without requiring a vJASS version. Do you require plain JASS versions for the vJASS? No. So why are you requiring vJASS on the cJASS stuff??

This will make everyone happy ^_^.

I'm not going to be submitting anymore resources until something gets resolved because I am not going to write the same resource two times UNLESS vJASS resources have to have a JASS resource counterpart. That is the only way you can justify cJASS resources having to have a vJASS resource counterpart.

Who else is with me?
 
Last edited:
Level 40
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
10,532
If you want me to choose between rejecting cJASS and making cJASS a standard, I would reject it without a second thought. People can post cJASS in threads because people can post whatever form they want in threads, but cJASS resources will not be accepted.

Also, we aren't "requiring vJASS on the cJASS versions". We just aren't allowing cJASS.

--

There's a big difference between some people using a tool for personal use and it being adopted as a standard. We'd be in a bit of a crisis as to which MPQ editor to use, for example, if this was the case.
 
Level 31
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,306
Because people have been posting vJASS versions and cJASS versions, it was made very unclear as to THW's stance on cJASS =). Also, if you look through the tool's replies, people have been asking questions.

You should put a sticky up or something saying that cJASS resources are not allowed and vJASS only =P

Thanks for the quick and clear clarification PurplePoot = D. +rep
 
Level 31
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,306
Registered User Element of Water
The power of the sea

Element of Water's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,818
Add to Element of Water's Reputation Element of Water is a jewel in the rough (233)Element of Water is a jewel in the rough (233)Element of Water is a jewel in the rough (233)

If this is approved, can we now submit pure cJass resources?

EDIT:
About the actual thing - I hate the way it removes all the indentation and unnecessary gaps and everything before running JassHelper. If you get a JassHelper error it's really hard to tell what it is when I can't even read the code your thing generates.

PS: Yes, I have AdicOptimizer tunred off, and yes, it still removes all the indentation.

And I think that just about sums it up.

Now before reading the rest of this, the point people on TheHelper are making is that they are saying cJASS is still Beta, ok. The rest of this post is rather serious and strong, but it might be due to unclear reasons on your part, which is another reason why a sticky would be very useful for THW's stance on cJASS and why. I wrote this post with the thought of cJASS never being fully approved on this site =) (cJASS never being allowed for use in writing resources), so just keep that in mind while reading it otherwise there could be a really big misunderstanding o-o, unless that really is your intention =O. Actually, if my understanding of the situation was wrong (the way the post was written), then you don't even need to bother reading below the ----------------------- line as it'd be a waste of time on your part ^_^.

So, I guess a good way to respond to this was that I got the wrong idea and you are just waiting for cJASS to be finalized (but then why did you approve the tool is what I want to know). Personally, I didn't think cJASS was still in Beta because it was submitted to the forums.

I Guess the other way to respond to this is to answer the really important question in the post.

Also, your comparison of an MPQ tool to cJASS was a pretty poor one. cJASS is used to actually create resources that are read on a site like this. MPQ Is not, it's just a means to open them.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In my opinion, I think your stance is wrong and I think you should allow cJASS, but you're the moderator, so you do what you want, you won't be seeing anything new from me, or probably from a mess of others who feel the same way. Rejecting something that obviously works and writes sound code is just going to cause segregation between the programmers, especially considering the fact that you can write vJASS if you want to.

I'm an extreme liberal, so it's pretty obvious how I feel about this.

Just answer me this question-
Are you really going to reprimand the community to fulfill your own agenda?

I myself have gained nothing from THW. I have read no tutorials nor have I used any resources from this site for inspiration or use in a map. The only thing I have done here is try to help others and submit resources for others to use. I don't do it for any glory or fame. I don't ask for reputation here or there... I create a resource to the best of my ability for other people to use. I am so strongly opposed to your stance because cJASS is an invaluable tool for the general community.

When you say that resources are not allowed to be written in cJASS, that to me is like saying you are going to stomp on the very community that creates the resources on THW today.

I don't think that this decision is yours to make.
 
Last edited:
Level 40
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
10,532
I approved cJASS because a lot of people like it; I dislike it myself. I'll add a note to my approval message noting that this does not imply it will be allowed for resources.

--

It is my decision to make, but I obviously can't just do whatever I feel like (like rejecting cJASS) because the public needs to be considered too for people to be at least somewhat happy. Why do I not want to standardize cJASS?

  • As mentioned, the tool is unstable and in general problematic. In addition, it's rather hacked together.

  • It has not been adopted as a standard elsewhere and for good reason as far as I see it.

  • If we allowed every language that someone made up then quite frankly the place would be a mess soon enough. You're welcome to use and share your cJASS code; it just won't be approved (unless, of course, a version working for those who are not using it [and thus is in either vJASS or JASS] is provided). It's not like I'm putting a ban on it—I'm just saying it can't be submitted independently. Let's face it, it's not like cJASS is much of an improvement on anything before it; it's not like you can do stuff in cJASS which is hard or messy to do in vJASS or JASS.


I'd be interested to know why your tone suddenly became so hostile.
 
Level 31
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,306
I'd be interested to know why your tone suddenly became so hostile.

I'm an extreme liberal

It'd be great if this was your note tho, or something close to it-
we aren't "requiring vJASS on the cJASS versions". We just aren't allowing cJASS.

--

There's a big difference between some people using a tool for personal use and it being adopted as a standard. We'd be in a bit of a crisis as to which MPQ editor to use, for example, if this was the case.

I approved cJASS because a lot of people like it; I dislike it myself. I'll add a note to my approval message noting that this does not imply it will be allowed for resources.

--

It is my decision to make, but I obviously can't just do whatever I feel like (like rejecting cJASS) because the public needs to be considered too for people to be at least somewhat happy. Why do I not want to standardize cJASS?

* As mentioned, the tool is unstable and in general problematic. In addition, it's rather hacked together.

* It has not been adopted as a standard elsewhere and for good reason as far as I see it.

* If we allowed every language that someone made up then quite frankly the place would be a mess soon enough. You're welcome to use and share your cJASS code; it just won't be approved (unless, of course, a version working for those who are not using it [and thus is in either vJASS or JASS] is provided). It's not like I'm putting a ban on it—I'm just saying it can't be submitted independently. Let's face it, it's not like cJASS is much of an improvement on anything before it; it's not like you can do stuff in cJASS which is hard or messy to do in vJASS or JASS.

These, as a note, would let people know THW's stance on the tool and it would let people know why.

You know, maybe making hosted project section for cJASS for while it remains in a -hack job- is a good idea, this way, people could submit resources (wouldn't be moderated) for later on if cJASS ever became another standard. It would make cJASS advocates happy as they could share and collaborate, and it would keep to the -this isn't official and we aren't moderating the resources here or approving of them- stance.

You could even put a sticky up there letting people know so that you reiterate the note in the Tool =).

Also it would help cJASS mature so that its bugs are fixed faster ^_^.

So, rather than having a cJASS section for cJASS resources that can be approved, make it sort of like RTC was I suppose, meaning that it isn't necessarily stable and anything written with it isn't going to be approved, but it is def there and there is def a community.
 
Level 3
Joined
Oct 20, 2008
Messages
43
ADOLF said:
1) As for cJass lacking key features. I have a very good concept of spell and system creation (including files and customizing parameters via setdef), but not all features for it are now finished. We're going to implement them together with other benefits in a couple of months. Then you'll have a new look on writing spells and systems.
2) As for bugs. Yes, we know that AdicHelper is not 100% error-free, but we fix bugs as soon as they are reported to us. I think, that's just matter of time.
3) As for public release. Lots of you haven't seen early builds of AdicHelper (good for you) - that's because we didn't release it to public. We've made a release only when we understood that we've fixed all major errors and compatibility issues and we thought that it was right time because more and more people came to using cJass.

This is why I think that now it's still not the right time to talk about accepting cJass as standart until it's clear that it is really needed for simple and effective coding. We'll do everything we can for these times to come as soon as possible.
nuff said
 
Level 8
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
451
Theres nothing in cJass right now that would make me to use it, but if some people do find it useful, then it is natural that there will be cJass resources appearing all around in the future.

I see nothing wrong allowing people to post them, but I do understand if Jass moderators who dont feel like reviewing them.

But yea, there should probably be some place for cJass stuff, since its not so good idea to just let them hang in Jass submission forum.
 
Level 15
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
618
http://www.wc3c.net/vexorian/zincmanual.html
Hah! Take that! Zinc! Included in JassHelper and has a c-like syntax.

Now we don't need that JNGPS anymore, Just Update Jasshelper and you got it :D

zinc has nothing to do with "not requering JNGPS or destroying cJass"

JNGPS is just an bunch of files put together with my libs to make programming faster and easier...

as well this is about cJass not JNGPS... zinc is part of vJass and is now an correct language "correct syntax accepted by vJass parser" which makes coding faster and more readable "in my case"

first of all i really am glade that zinc was added! why? coz if there are requests or i want to make spells for public i can make quick code "as i like" which is more C like and post it here... i dont like old vJass syntax at all...

however zinc cant replace cJass coz its different, it has some better things than cJass but opposite as well.

main power of cJass are defines and just simply ++ and all that stuff, which zinc does not have jet or maybe wont have at all.

as well syntax is different there is still that function keyword and its slower to write -> type then just start with type which makes more sence to me, as well is C like.

as well i am just about to update JNGPS to have zinc and cJass which works with zinc now...

i like zinc a lot coz of how it works, for example its an completely new language "syntax" and its a must to follow its rules.

Msg("test"); // correct
Msg("test") // wrong

if (!false) // correct
if (not false) // wrong
if !false // wrong

and so on... currently only thing i dont like about cJass is that it depends on JassHelper and its syntax so it cant return error if i write "not" or "and"...

i will still code in cJass in making of my projects and in zinc for anything else... vJass is dead for me now!

so i like both JassHelper and AdicHelper

about JNGPS zinc does not add new functions, macros, types and whatever, as well does not update GUI...
 
Level 40
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
10,532
Why is it that people are convinced that C-based syntax is the only kind in existence/the only good kind?

Also, I think that the -> syntax for returns is one of the best syntax changes around. It allows the function to read normally while not being the incredibly awkward unreadable mess that is C++.

Also, don't get your hopes up on seeing ++/--/etc any time soon. I'd be surprised if Vex ever adds them, and I don't really blame him.
 
Level 12
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Messages
1,181
cJass and vJass are Jass preprocessor, all codes will be converted into Jass

Not the point.

@PurplePoot: I like type FuncName(param) more than function FuncName(param) -> return.

Both cJASS and zinc are nice, but when I want C syntax I'll open MSVC++. To me, the extra requirements (Jasshelper, AdicHelper) aren't justified by the amount of code I type faster.
 
Level 16
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
1,570
zinc has nothing to do with "not requering JNGPS or destroying cJass"

JNGPS is just an bunch of files put together with my libs to make programming faster and easier...

as well this is about cJass not JNGPS... zinc is part of vJass and is now an correct language "correct syntax accepted by vJass parser" which makes coding faster and more readable "in my case"

first of all i really am glade that zinc was added! why? coz if there are requests or i want to make spells for public i can make quick code "as i like" which is more C like and post it here... i dont like old vJass syntax at all...

however zinc cant replace cJass coz its different, it has some better things than cJass but opposite as well.

main power of cJass are defines and just simply ++ and all that stuff, which zinc does not have jet or maybe wont have at all.

as well syntax is different there is still that function keyword and its slower to write -> type then just start with type which makes more sence to me, as well is C like.

as well i am just about to update JNGPS to have zinc and cJass which works with zinc now...

i like zinc a lot coz of how it works, for example its an completely new language "syntax" and its a must to follow its rules.

Msg("test"); // correct
Msg("test") // wrong

if (!false) // correct
if (not false) // wrong
if !false // wrong

and so on... currently only thing i dont like about cJass is that it depends on JassHelper and its syntax so it cant return error if i write "not" or "and"...

i will still code in cJass in making of my projects and in zinc for anything else... vJass is dead for me now!

so i like both JassHelper and AdicHelper

about JNGPS zinc does not add new functions, macros, types and whatever, as well does not update GUI...

I know, i was just being an ass....:ugly:
And i know cJass and ZINC are not comparable, and that it is just what you prefer (vJass, cJass or ZINC).

I also like the type name (param) syntax, but i still prefer good readability over quick writing, so i'm gonna stick with vJass, for now.
(Im not saying that cJass hasnt got good readability, just less than vJass IMO)
 
Level 15
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
618
Why is it that people are convinced that C-based syntax is the only kind in existence/the only good kind?

not really i like zinc syntax as well, however i like C one more, thats all.

Also, I think that the -> syntax for returns is one of the best syntax changes around. It allows the function to read normally while not being the incredibly awkward unreadable mess that is C++.

yes thats one nice syntax and it makes zinc to be "zinc"! thats part of it i like as well, however i again like C syntax more, which does not mean i dont like zinc ;)

Also, don't get your hopes up on seeing ++/--/etc any time soon. I'd be surprised if Vex ever adds them, and I don't really blame him.

i as well think he wont add them at all... but thats fine since that makes zinc to be "zinc" xD

I know, i was just being an ass....
And i know cJass and ZINC are not comparable, and that it is just what you prefer (vJass, cJass or ZINC).

I also like the type name (param) syntax, but i still prefer good readability over quick writing, so i'm gonna stick with vJass, for now.
(Im not saying that cJass hasnt got good readability, just less than vJass IMO)

well yeah if you like a little bit more readable code than "C" one, but want to type faster than in jass. then zinc is the best for that. else i like cJass more, coz i already think in "C" way xD so when i see C code its all readable to me!

Greets all!
~DD
 
Last edited:
Level 40
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
10,532
Not the point.

@PurplePoot: I like type FuncName(param) more than function FuncName(param) -> return.

Both cJASS and zinc are nice, but when I want C syntax I'll open MSVC++. To me, the extra requirements (Jasshelper, AdicHelper) aren't justified by the amount of code I type faster.
type name seems nice until you realize that you are also struct methods, "global" functions, etc, and they all look exactly the same. I don't mind type name in C/Java because they are not ambiguous, but in C++ they are the definition of ambiguous.
 
Level 9
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
704
Are Zinc resources accepted? Not that I would ever consider writing stuff in Zinc (cJass allows so much more freedom, and my own preproccesor sort of depends on cJass), but if Zinc is allowed and cJass not, I find something a touch unfair.
 
Level 9
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
704
How so?

Zinc is being accepted simply because it's already part of a program, part of something included by default in a mod for WE. Anything Vexorian adds will automatically be accepted by this logic because it's already in and we don't need to download more.

cJass installed beautifully. It took 10 seconds to point it to my folder. Why do people have a problem with installing something new? They did it for JNGP, they should be able to do it for cJass.

cJass has a few bugs, but unstable? Really? I don't recall it ever crashing, except when I made a stupid coding error. Granted, this should probably fixed for debugging simplicity, but that can happen over time. And the tool works perfect when your code is fine.

cJass can get better. It's a fairly new tool when compared to vJass.

Frankly, all I'm seeing is "Vexorian did it, it's accepted by default". Which is why I say it seems unfair.
 
Level 5
Joined
Oct 26, 2009
Messages
161
cJass is unstable because it conflicts with vJass and ZINC in many ways if you have both active at once. Sometimes things won't compile when they would without cJass enabled and so forth, resulting in maps that won't compile no matter what when they rightfully should. (And would if you'd never used cJass)
Mooglefrooglian said:
cJass can get better. It's a fairly new tool when compared to vJass.
It's older than ZINC, and ZINC is already better-supported with faster bug fixes and quicker feature additions.
Mooglefrooglian said:
Frankly, all I'm seeing is "Vexorian did it, it's accepted by default". Which is why I say it seems unfair.
Even if that's the case, it is an understandable stance. Vexorian has created many tools that define the way people make maps in WC3; his reputation precedes him and he's clearly properly supporting them. Because of that, it is much easier/safer/reliable to allow things he creates. Is that unfair? Maybe, but oh well, it's a legitimate decision.
 
Level 9
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
704
cJass is unstable because it conflicts with vJass and ZINC in many ways if you have both active at once. Sometimes things won't compile when they would without cJass enabled and so forth, resulting in maps that won't compile no matter what when they rightfully should. (And would if you'd never used cJass)

Forgive me, doesn't cJass ignore Zinc blocks?

VD said:
Code inside of zinc tags is completely ignored by cjass.

~VD

It's older than ZINC, and ZINC is already better-supported with faster bug fixes and quicker feature additions.

And yet, Vexorian refuses to add some features. Library prioritization comes to mind. What are we to do if we want those features? Code them ourselves? I do for some of what I want (thanks for Grimoire by the way Vexorian, Poot and others), but what If I dont want to spend hours working on features? I want a tool that will do it for me. And if Vexorian is refusing, and we can't actually submit resources using a non-Vexorian tool, we're kinda stumped.

Even if that's the case, it is an understandable stance. Vexorian has created many tools that define the way people make maps in WC3; his reputation precedes him and he's clearly properly supporting them. Because of that, it is much easier/safer/reliable to allow things he creates. Is that unfair? Maybe, but oh well, it's a legitimate decision.

While I agree logically it's a good idea to accept tools made by someone with a good reuptation, rejecting resources made by another tool which, in my eyes, appears to work perfect (excepting some minor bugs, such as two defines on the same line being used) is in fact unfair and quite illogical.

Especially considering that Zinc is not cJass. They have different function declarations, among other things, and cJass is a lot freer (something like being able to swtich freely between vjass and cjass syntax in the same trigger comes to mind, not requiring ( and ) for ifs, etc).

You can't interchange the two. They are two different things, just related in that they share a lot of c syntax, such as set/call removal. I see no reason why it has to be one or the other.
 
Level 40
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
10,532
It interferes with vJass too; I've noticed a lot of "bugs" people report with vJass that are fixed when disabling the cJass preprocessor, because the latter is badly coded (doesn't take into account many parts of vJass syntax, and yet is built off of vJass).

In addition, languages have limitations. Get over it. Many of these limitations are intentional, whether to protect you from yourself/others or because the feature does not fit the language's design. We don't want C++: Warcraft, as it's bad enough for one C++ to exist as it is.

cJass does not really add anything to Jass (some argue that defines are useful, but that's pretty much it), creates bugs with a tool it has to interact with, is not standard for people to have. It failed to get community support for these reasons. Once the rest of you get over the fact that syntax is not the be all and end all of a language and actually try to be programmers, then you might realize why the communities have taken this position. cJass is a bad toy rather than a utility.

Your post clearly outlines that you do not understand why Zinc exists in addition to vJass. Many people could care less that you guys think that the most important thing in a language is whether you write bool foo(int bar) {, foo(integer bar) -> boolean {, or function foo takes integer bar returns boolean, since it isn't. The reason Zinc exists is that its syntax makes certain additions, such as anonymous functions, make sense, whereas they would not in a language such as vJass where the line-by-line block syntax makes any such addition be a hack which doesn't fit.

--

Please don't credit me for JNGP, as I won't have contributed any code until the next release.
 
Level 12
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
850
IMO, the problem with vJASS is newbs have no clue how to get it to compile. You have to tell them to get JNGP, extract, ignore anti-viruse programs, open it, open map, save, test and go. Now you have to do all that, expect now that have to download another folder that they might have a problem with and have no clue what it does. Then you get people flaming eachother becuase the noobs want to know why it just wasn't there in the first place.

EDIT: Why is this page streached so freaking much too?
 
Level 21
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
3,096
1: I hope I'm not necroposting... :eek:

2: If cJass doesn't get approved as a stand-alone language in the spells section, I'm out of this forum, because I have no other purpose here.
I spend my time programming in C++, Expression2(Who's syntax is identical to C++'s) and cJass because it's easier. The syntax offers more possibilities in your code.

I don't say you should approve it just for me or something like that.
You should approve it for other people that wish to use it and publish their work here.
But, why isn't it "official"? Because it's not made by Blizzard? vJass isn't made by Blizzard and you consider it official? Discrimination.

The idea of dividing the spells section in the three smaller sections is the best way to solve this conflict.
 
Level 40
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
10,532
I spend my time programming in C++, Expression2(Who's syntax is identical to C++'s) and cJass because it's easier. The syntax offers more possibilities in your code.
If you can't adapt to another syntax let alone paradigm then you are hardly a programmer.

But, why isn't it "official"? Because it's not made by Blizzard? vJass isn't made by Blizzard and you consider it official? Discrimination.
Setting up a straw man and then knocking it down.

The idea of dividing the spells section in the three smaller sections is the best way to solve this conflict.
When you can't decide, just do what everyone wants, because there are two sides to every issue!
 
> If you can't adapt to another syntax let alone paradigm then you are hardly a programmer.

Or you don't want to learn the syntax.
As a someone whom is learning C, I like cJASS. I use it all the time.
Yes, I realize that it depends on JassHelper. That's fine. 99% of Windows/Linux-based Jassers have JassHelper.

So meh on that.

As for approved resources, well, just because THW doesn't allow them, doesn't mean others don't.
 
All programming languages should be approveable, as long as they well-written and supported.

If we have to less of the moderators who know the programming language, we could still disable the section or make it instantly approved with a Mark:
Warning, this resource can not be reviewed yet, because there is no moderator supporting it yet. Use it under your own risk.
 
Level 21
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
3,096
cJass no, ZINC yes.

Congratulations, Guevara...

This is communism. CJass should be accepted as a programming language in the jass and/or spells section, like vJass is.

One of the reasons why I call Vexorian Stalin is because he introduced Zinc with force inside vJass... And like others of his type, he's "trying to protect others from themselves"... Or he sais so...
You don't have to use ZINC, and you don't have to use cJass either.
Accepting it doesn't mean anyone has to use it...
No one here is against ZINC but why are some people against cJass? Because it's better? Are you afraid or something like that?
 
Level 40
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
10,532
All programming languages should be approveable, as long as they well-written and supported.

If we have to less of the moderators who know the programming language, we could still disable the section or make it instantly approved with a Mark:
Warning, this resource can not be reviewed yet, because there is no moderator supporting it yet. Use it under your own risk.
And why should they be?

Congratulations, Guevara...

This is communism. CJass should be accepted as a programming language in the jass and/or spells section, like vJass is.

One of the reasons why I call Vexorian Stalin is because he introduced Zinc with force inside vJass... And like others of his type, he's "trying to protect others from themselves"... Or he sais so...
You don't have to use ZINC, and you don't have to use cJass either.
Accepting it doesn't mean anyone has to use it...
No one here is against ZINC but why are some people against cJass? Because it's better? Are you afraid or something like that?
This kid.
 
Level 20
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
1,960
vercas said:
Congratulations, Guevara...

This is communism. CJass should be accepted as a programming language in the jass and/or spells section, like vJass is.

One of the reasons why I call Vexorian Stalin is because he introduced Zinc with force inside vJass... And like others of his type, he's "trying to protect others from themselves"... Or he sais so...
You don't have to use ZINC, and you don't have to use cJass either.
Accepting it doesn't mean anyone has to use it...
No one here is against ZINC but why are some people against cJass? Because it's better? Are you afraid or something like that?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
 
Level 12
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
850
vJASS has been around long enough for any problems to be hammerd out, cJASS is fairly new, so adding it, finding a fatal bug, and then having to purge all the old cJASS spells is more then a waste of time. Wait for it to become perfected, then bring it up. Vex has gained support and trust, and thats probably why ZINC is allowed, its from a trusted source.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top