Re: [Arianne-devel] GUI Protocol

[Joe L. <ly...@ge...>]

A little out of order, so I can clarify my thinking.

On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 20:26:37 +0100 (MET), MIGUEL ANGEL BLANCH LARDIN
wrote:

[snip]
>> It's still a good idea, and could work better than my preconceptions
>> (which are all from first person shooters) of how network coding should
>> be done. (I can't really compare, as I'm not sure I fully understand
>> certain things you wish to do.)
>
>No, no, no, all the above code is just to communicate the GUI with the Client, 
>there is no network here... Yes, I know, I am insane, I am mad! :-)

Well, this clarifies a bit, as I was under the impression that this was
client to server communication, just by the way it was described.  It's
not as if the code between the client peices needs to be static.. I
kinda like the idea of a internal client protocol.

>Well, we later can change them by <e>, but really this is not important at all.
>The idea is to make the whole system as independent as possible from each other 
>piece of the code, that is why it is taking us so much time...
>I develop the first Arianne in just a few weeks, but the code was primitive, 
>ugly and inneficient. Actual code is really a state-of-the-art
 
If it's within the client itself, there's probably a minimal processing
overhead.  The reason I thought it was bulky had to do with the fact
that it sounded like server-to-client (and vice versa) information (in
which case it would be kinda bulky).  It sounds like it would be fine
for what you intend.

>> I also have to admit that I'm a bit confused why you would say to move
>> x units along an axis.  I would imagine it would be easier to say "move
>> me in *this* direction until i say stop."  Perhaps I'm just too buried
>> in the world of first person shooters to really see why you would move
>> x units along an axis, but anyway.
>
>No, the idea is say move to THERE, where there is a point(x,y,z).
>ALPHA 1 uses the FPS approach and it really sucks.

internally in the client the idea of "move me HERE" makes sense..
Again, I was under the misconception that this was a server-client
idea, in which case it isn't such a great idea, because the client
should never be trusted.  But again, I think that this makes for a
pretty good basis for internal client communication.

-Joe