HelpChat/DeluxeMenus

MSPT 300+ OVER (getScriptEngine) [DEV BUILD 184]

Opened this issue · 6 comments

iGabyTM commented

Don't use the js requirement unless you must.
There's built-in types for the most basic requirements. Keep js as the last option.

  • 👍1
GG-MD commented

Don't use the js requirement unless you must. There's built-in types for the most basic requirements. Keep js as the last option.

This was not previously the case, will this be optimized in the future?????

iGabyTM commented

I'm not saying it is ok for the js requirement to take up this much resources. What I'm saying is that you should not use the js requirement if there is already a dedicated requirement for what you want. For example %vault_eco_balance% > 500 can be written as a requirement with type > (see the wiki)

GG-MD commented

I'm not saying it is ok for the js requirement to take up this much resources. What I'm saying is that you should not use the js requirement if there is already a dedicated requirement for what you want. For example %vault_eco_balance% > 500 can be written as a requirement with type > (see the wiki)

Everything that DeluxeMenus supports is 100% utilized, unfortunately what is not possible already works via JavaScript, very much waiting for updates.

BlitzOffline commented

Don't use the js requirement unless you must. There's built-in types for the most basic requirements. Keep js as the last option.

This was not previously the case, will this be optimized in the future?????

We use an out of the box engine. We do not have our own engine. If something changed, it wasn't because of us and most likely it isn't something we can fix unfortunately. We will look into this when we have time.

GG-MD commented

Don't use the js requirement unless you must. There's built-in types for the most basic requirements. Keep js as the last option.

This was not previously the case, will this be optimized in the future?????

We use an out of the box engine. We do not have our own engine. If something changed, it wasn't because of us and most likely it isn't something we can fix unfortunately. We will look into this when we have time.

The problem is yours - on older builds of your plugin everything was perfect, the most recent build currently showing a much better result, but still not perfect.