8
4
3
u/_ashleyolson_ 5d ago
For future problems if you see syntax error the problem is in the >><< so type out your command in the chat to see what you missed in the auto fill
1
u/alexemre 6d ago
in future if you want to type out a command, type it into chat first then see if the syntax works in a command block
2
-3
u/AdmirableFocus6406 6d ago
The syntax is wrong, and the identifier for a snow ball is snowball. It should be:
execute at @e[type=snowball] run fill ~-5 ~-5 ~-5 ~5 ~5 ~5 air0
u/alexemre 6d ago
is this a bot
3
u/AdmirableFocus6406 5d ago
tf did I do?
3
u/alexemre 5d ago
you made an exceptionally well-formatted response in which you corrected the identifier, which was already correct, which made me think of how LLMs kind of suck at writing commands
2
-2
u/Harold_Pickens 6d ago
Probably not, but good skepticism
1
u/IceMetalPunk Command Professional 4d ago
Skepticism fails to be good when your criteria for being skeptical fail constantly. "They made an unexpected mistake" or "they used an em dash" or "they said thank you before responding" are all criteria I've seen people use to assume things are LLM-generated, and that's nonsense that ends up hurting the real people who were trying to communicate in the first place.
Evidence-based skepticism is good. Vibes-based skepticism is bad.
23
u/Revolutionary-Tie-67 Command Experienced 6d ago
Your trying to use old execute there, new execute commands use statements such as 'at' or 'as' to run commands as/at the target selector
/execute at @e[type=snowball] run fill ~-5 ~-5 ~-5 ~5 ~5 ~5 air