"Curtis L. Olson" wrote: > [snip] > > 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. >
Bear with me while I get up to speed with the property system but I'm just brainstorming... Assuming we create some write-only properties that are tied to commands. Perhaps something like: /command/view/next /command/view/prev Writing a value to /command/view/next switches to the next view. Now this functionality duplicates the view-cycle builtin command so I'm wondering if should combine these two concepts? Bernie _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
