Yeah, and that's kinda why I don't really like Wc3C, since they seems to be very conservative, and doesn't really want to approach anything from more than one angle...
And that is probably also why not that much gets approved there. And also that is the worst way of "behaving", as it tends to talk against inventing new stuff, that might be done in a better way
But I'd still say that JNGP is (Or at least should be) in most cases
well i thing there are SOME conventions used in jass/vjass.
like starting method names with small letters and beginning each new word with a capital letter.
or writing globals constants with big letters and _ dividing the words.
or starting struct names with a capital letter.
there are so much things to add to this list...
Yes, there are many forms the (v)JASS standards take. Many are related to standards in all programming languages, and many are related to the syntax of the language itself.
Trollvottel named a few such as camelCase for method names (or CamelCase for function names).
Others include camelCase for local variables, CamelCase for global variables, and CamelCase for struct/library/scope names.
Textmacros are not very clean looking, and so few people want to use a system that uses textmacros for the interface.
Indentation/Tab length is a standard 4 spaces, with block starters/enders being on the same line as others in the parent block.
If an object is not to be used outside the current scope, it should be [ljass]private[/ljass]. If it should be used outside the current scope, it can be either [ljass]public[/ljass] or have no label, depending on how likely the name is to be used. This is largely because not too many people look favorably on the use of the "_" symbol to separate the scope name and the object. Many prefer the "." symbol, or dislike the use of long names for objects.
There is a lot of leniency, but as long as the interface is 'clean', it doesn't matter TOO much what the code on the inside looks like.
Ghan has said he has fixed this. Monovertex please confirm this fix. This was only a problem with people that had signatures in the upper levels like not the special members but the respected members.