WoWInterface - A more efficient 'enemies in range'?

WoWInterface (https://www.wowinterface.com/forums/index.php)

- AddOn Help/Support (https://www.wowinterface.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3)

- - A more efficient 'enemies in range'? (https://www.wowinterface.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58354)

A more efficient 'enemies in range'?

So this is what I have right now for seeing if there are 3+ enemies in combat and within range of whirlwind. Is there a more elegant solution? Broken out into multiple ifs just for debugging purposes.

Code:

function are3EnemiesInRange()

  local inRange = 0

  local id

  for i = 1, 40 do

      id = "nameplate" .. i

      --local message = ""

      if UnitExists(id) then

        --message = id .. " "

        if UnitAffectingCombat(id) then

          -- message = message .. "in combat "

            if UnitIsEnemy("player",id) then

              -- message = message .. "is hostile "

              if IsItemInRange(63427, id) == true then

                -- message = message .. "in range"

                  inRange = inRange + 1

              end

            end

        end

      end

      -- if (message ~= "") then

      --    print (message)

      -- end 

      if (inRange > 2 ) then

        break

      end

  end

  

  return (inRange > 2)

end

I don't know how nameplate numbering works, but if it always starts at 1 then maybe you could add this optimization:

Lua Code:

for i = 1, 40 do
    id = "nameplate" .. i
    if UnitExists(id) then
        -- etc...
    else
        break;
    end
end

UnitCanAttack should be used insteadof UnitIsEnemy and UnitAffectingCombat since Whirlwind will hit a unit whether it is in combat or not. UnitExists is implied if any Unit function returns true so it can be removed. Also, inRange only updates in one place so you should check it's value right after instead of at the end of the loop where it may not have changed.

Code:

function are3EnemiesInRange()

  local inRange = 0

  for id = 1, 40 do

      local unitID = "nameplate" .. id

      if UnitCanAttack("player", unitID) and IsItemInRange(63427, unitID) then

        inRange = inRange + 1

        if inRange >= 3 then return true end

      end

  end

end

You can also use C_NamePlate.GetNamePlates to get only visible nameplates. A plus to this is it gives you the nameplate.

Lua Code:

function are3EnemiesInRange()
    local inRange, unitID = 0
    for _, plate in pairs(C_NamePlate.GetNamePlates()) do
        unitID = plate.namePlateUnitToken
        if UnitCanAttack("player", unitID) and IsItemInRange(63427, unitID) then
            inRange = inRange + 1
            if inRange >= 3 then return true end
        end
    end
end

Perfect Vrul! I wasn't aware of UnitCanAttack, between that and removing the exists check I should be able to drop some time off the function.

DahkCeles - nameplates is a fixed array, it doesn't compress or expand as nameplates are added or removed. If nameplate1 points to a mob, and that mob dies, nameplate1 becomes a null even though nameplate2 may still point to a mob.

If you value efficiency over elegance then you want a slightly modified version of what jeruku posted:

Code:

function are3EnemiesInRange()

  local inRange, nameplates = 0, C_NamePlate.GetNamePlates()

  for index = 1, #nameplates do

      local unit = nameplates[index].namePlateUnitToken

      if UnitCanAttack("player", unit) and IsItemInRange(63427, unit) then

        if inRange > 1 then return true end

        inRange = inRange + 1

      end

  end

end

If the garbage churn is too much then this is an alternative:

Code:

local pairs_iter, nameplates = pairs(NamePlateDriverFrame.pools.pools.NamePlateUnitFrameTemplate.activeObjects)



function are3EnemiesInRange()

  local inRange = 0

  for nameplate in pairs_iter, nameplates, nil do

      if UnitCanAttack("player", nameplate.unit) and IsItemInRange(63427, nameplate.unit) then

        if inRange > 1 then return true end

        inRange = inRange + 1

      end

  end

end

This is more efficient than my previous post's code for a lower number of nameplates. My previous post's code is more efficient the closer you are to 40 nameplates. I'm not sure where the break even point is but my guess is the top code in this post is better in the long run as long as its not in an unthrottled OnUpdate script.

Nice. Yeah, this is throttled to once ever 100ms.

Thanks!
-Rick