Are you sure you want to report this?

We've split up the commands, scripting and mods, and add ons category! Please be sure you get your thread in the right place.


increase limit of gamerule FunctionCommandLimit


Post a new comment:

Please sign in to leave a comment.

  • 0
    Comment actions Permalink

    I would really hate a true upper limit of 10,000. With porting my softfp library to CBA C (which is an Assembler and Very Minimal C Compiler), some of the things that need to be done to simply add 2 floating point numbers will quickly exceed 10k with just a few commands (esp with the fact that a memory lookup needs to take place, which is absolutely disgusting without some sort of proper variable system).  This is a huge barrier (and I can't even sync, which tells it to wait until the next game tick, or I risk breaking the in-operation atomacy that the library guarantees). I don't even want to think about how many commands are in a simple USRH operation. I think removing the upper limit entirely is a good idea, so that server operators can set an arbitrary amount of commands to run. Esp when you have really stupid functions like exp(x). (e^x = 1 + x + (x^2)/2 + (x^3)/6 + (x^4)/24 + (x^5)/120 + ... + (x^n)/n! for lim[n->∞]). Even going up to n=7 (where the function converges close enough to e^x to be valid for IEEE754), that is 9 additions, and 7 pow/fact operations (my way of optimizing taylor series to not compute an O(n) recursive function twice). 

    I highly doubt I could run more than 1 exp(x) calls in the same tick without crashing right through the 10k upper limit.

  • 0
    Cart3rBart3r commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    No limit would be nice for setting up loops without a repeating command block by just having a a function call for a function that calls for it. It would make things just that much cleaner.