"Drew Kirkpatrick" wrote:
> Once again with the help of Poine (still owe ya that beer man), I
> found my problem. So the way network communications is happening with
> net_ctrls, and the FGNetCtrls object, the non-portability of the
> mechanism is readily apparent.
I know, playing the 'weisenheimer' _after_ an accident has occurred is
always an easy trick ....
The issue of non-portability of the time-critical net code in
FlightGear (and thereof the lack of a stable protocol layout) is a long
standing one, has been discussed several times and has already
prevented some projects from using FlightGear as an image generator.
>From memorizing past discussions I think I can state that gettings
things into the right shape (TM) definitely will make some people
happy :-)
> Poine votes for using RPC. I thought this would be a good time for a
> discussion on the wishes and desires for netcode. Any thoughts on the
> subject?
Using RPC requires you to run a portmapper on each system, but you
don't always want this. I'm convinced there are other chances to get
the job done.
The architects of the new multiplayer network protocol probably have
some good recommendations - as I think/hope they did it in a portable
fashion .... !?!?
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
