"Curtis L. Olson" wrote:
> 
> First, let me point out the new telnet server is *very* nice.  Bernie
> has rewritten it based on the plib net libs.  It can handle multiple
> concurrent connections.  This is a big improvement!

I'm not sure why you would need to run two or more sessions but there
you go.  The server design is based on Curt's httpd classes so I can't
take full credit.

> 
> Along with this, Bernie has also provided a demo python script that
> shows how you can use the telnet interface to remotely interact with
> and control a FlightGear application.  In the cvs source (run "cvs
> update -d" of course) look in $toplevel/scripts/python for the demo
> script.
> 
> So, to try this out run:
> 
>     fgfs --telnet=5500
>     python demo.py
> 
> Then watch the action.  This is a demo of functionality so you aren't
> going to see any earth shattering visual effects.  But, it's very cool
> from the geeky perspective of running an external script which has
> complete control over flightgear.

The python code is very experimental, really just proof of concept
stuff.  I was just toying around seeing how to use the props interface. 
I was thinking that this concept could be developed into a full blown
demostration for exhibitions.  A takeoff, circuit and landing, complete
with cut-aways to external views, zooms and pans, all under script
control would be really cool.

> 
> Bernie, on the subjects of building additional commands into the
> telnet interface, I agree with Melchior.  I'd rather not see the
> telnet interface being crammed with a bunch of extra commands that
> only the telnet interface knows about.  I haven't looked at this in a
> while, but the property manager should be able to manage "commands" as
> well as "values".  The command management is a bit of a hack (kind of
> but not really) but since we can tie variables to funtions (usually
> getters and setters) we can expose additional functionality through
> the property interface.
> 
> I think that would be the more appropriate way to do this and to
> develop additional commands.  This way, these commands will be
> available (and consistant) for any other interface mechanisms
> including joystick, keyboard, mouse in addition to remote scripts or
> web browsers, etc.
> 

I don't have a complete handle on the property system yet.  However if
we can do these sort of things through properties and/or the command
manager then that is definitely the way to go.

Cheers,
Bernie

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to