PureBasic Forums - English

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by MrVainSCL.

Hi Fred
This topic was very often wished and dicused by different guys on this forum! UDP Network would be really great for network games, and other appz like sharing tools!



PIII450, 256MB Ram, 80GB HD + 6,4 GB, RivaTNT, DirectX8.1, SB AWE64, Win2000 + all Updates...

greetz
MrVainSCL! aka Thorsten

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by tranquil.

I agree with MrVain. UDP is strongly required for NetworkGaming and Streaming media. As we complete our filesharingtool next weeks (hopefully)But for this I now need UDP to query Servers without an existend connection. I know the possibility of the loose of datas but that does not matter in this case.

After that I want to try to code a small network game in PB. (Bomberman rulez hehe) UDP would be fine here.

Tbese Commands would be fine:

send=SendUDPNetworkData(ip.l,port.w,*buffer,length.l)
Returns the amount of send Bytes of the Buffer, returns WSAError() on fail

received=ReceiveUDPNetworkData(UDPSocket.w,*buffer,length.l)
Trys to receive the waiting Datas to store in *buffer defined by the length

UDPSocket.w=NetworkUDPEvent()
Returns the SocketID of the Incoming UDPDatas.

success=FreeUDPSocket(UDPSocket.w)
After Receiving and processing the Datas here is the possibillity to free the socket again for other used of this handle. It returns 0 is success and -1 if fails.

eventtypeid=NetworkServerEvent() / eventtypeid=NetworkClientEvent()
should be enhanced with a new return-value that indicates an incoming of UDP Datas.

Should be all for now.
Other suggestions are welcome.

Cheers
Mike





Tranquilizer/ Secretly!
http://www.secretly.de
Registred PureBasic User
System: Windows 2000 Server, 512 MB Ram, GeForce4200 TI 128 MB DDR, Hercules Theater 6.1 DTS Sound

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.

I would like to see UDP support too!

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Danilo.

MrVain / Tranquil:
You know all the network stuff (at least it seems so),
so why dont you just write some procedures for UDP ??
(Just wondering...)

Last thing Fred said about UDP was that he doesnt like
it because it looses Data. Its Freds opinion and it
sounded like UDP will not come within the next time...

cya,
...Danilo

(registered PureBasic user)

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by tranquil.

It doesnt matter if Fred likes it or not. Its an absolute standard in Networking and if its requested a lot by many more ppl Fred should include it.

Sure you can do it with the OpenNetworkConnection command, but as you know UDP is >, thats the reason for speedup, so why should I create a connection first? Does not make sense...


Mike

Tranquilizer/ Secretly!
http://www.secretly.de
Registred PureBasic User
System: Windows 2000 Server, 512 MB Ram, GeForce4200 TI 128 MB DDR, Hercules Theater 6.1 DTS Sound

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Danilo.

> It doesnt matter if Fred likes it or not.

Fred is the one and only boss here.
When he doesnt like it and doesnt want it IN HIS OWN
programming language, he will not add it.

We are in "feature requests and wishlist" here.
None of this 2 things ("request" & "wish") means
Fred MUST add anything.

Sometimes i get the feeling that some guys here
think Fred must add all wishes asap.

The wishlist is for discussing the things somebody
wishes and Fred can decide to add it or not.
Maybe he has other priorities (esp. 3D is a bigger task)
at this time and wants to think about this wish later...
maybe next month... maybe in 2 years... who knows.

> Its an absolute standard in Networking and if its requested
> a lot by many more ppl Fred should include it.

It would be nice, yes - but its not a must.

> Sure you can do it with the OpenNetworkConnection command,
> but as you know UDP is >,
> thats the reason for speedup, so why should I create a connection
> first? Does not make sense...

I didnt say anything about this.

I just gave you some hint:
"Why not write your own procedures for UDP instead
waiting 1 year for it?"

Its your choice...
write your own stuff (you said you need it within
next weeks, but its not sure that 3.50 will have
UDP support) or wait and wait and wait and wait...

Writing your own stuff needs some hours, maybe some days.
The time you have to wait for PB UDP-support is undefined atm.

Its just a hint, seriously.

cya,
...Danilo

(registered PureBasic user)

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.

> Fred is the one and only boss here.
Fred is may be the "boss" but we are the paying customers.

Note: I am not demanding anything here I am just putting my vote out for features I think will make PureBasic even better. I realize and respect the fact that this is Fred's gig and he is who makes the decisions as to what gets priority for his limited time. I really appreciate the service he provides.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Danilo.

> Fred is may be the "boss" but we are the paying customers.

Yep, thats right.
But -IMHO- this doesnt mean Fred is our slave
and has to do what we say. We can only make suggestions.

IF Fred would say next week he gives up with PureBasic,
we could do nothing.
We paid for PureBasic and we get the updates for free, IF any.

Of course Fred will never ever give up with PB...

cya,
...Danilo

(registered PureBasic user)

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by tranquil.

@TheBeck:

You are totaly right. What you get is what you pay for. But I do not need a 3d support in a language wich does not fullfill the standards of all.

On Freds side I would try to see ppl who bought my product are happy and tell this his friends. This is the best advertise you can get to sell you product. No type of advertizeing is better the telling friends. But if other ppl see that customers requests Commands that are ignored, thats not realy good if you want to sale your product.

The custumers together should form the way of PB, not only one Boss who decides. But I see, what Fred whants to do or do not want to do, Its his thingie. But if this is the right way, who knows!?

Cheers
Mike

Tranquilizer/ Secretly!
http://www.secretly.de
Registred PureBasic User
System: Windows 2000 Server, 512 MB Ram, GeForce4200 TI 128 MB DDR, Hercules Theater 6.1 DTS Sound

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fweil.

...,

I suppose we sometime forget to split between feature requests and wishlists ! OK we need really some things like unlimited strings good floats etc ...

But they are so much things we have and so much things we can do with Purebasic in its actual version that I agree fully with Danilo.

Absolute standards do not mean anything for me.

I also agree that more and more functions and features are better, but at the speed we are asking features and functions, I am sure that nobody woud digest it if Fred answered all.

Of course we have different ways and interests in using Purebasic, but even if Purebasic is done for games it is not exactly a game and pushing a piece of it somewhere may upset many other part of the building.

Networking is not as easy as some people seem to think. This is certainly the reason why Fred does not want to hop on it.

Hope you understand what I mean and I mean nothing bad.

KRgrds

Francois Weil
14, rue Douer
F64100 Bayonne

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by MrVainSCL.

Original by Danilo:
We are in "feature requests and wishlist" here.
None of this 2 things ("request" & "wish") means
Fred MUST add anything.

As Tranquilizer said: "....requested a lot by many more ppl Fred should include it." - He wrote he should include not Fred must"" Btw "must" and "should" are two different things!



Now i must brake the big discussion about who is the boss and what stuff should be included to PB...



I think Fred should first fix all know bugs for the next version and optimize all the libs before adding new and more stuff!! It make no sence to have new commands (maybe 3D stuff too), if the kernel of a created executeable doensnt really works correctly on all systems! So he should fix/split this first to get a very stable version before adding again new commands and somewhere in future splitting the libs and having again new bugs in old working commands! (just my personal opinion)

Then he could add new features/commands... Btw take a look to BlitzBasicPC for example, which have very lot network commands - including full UDP support!

I think it would really make sence to add (no must!) UDP support to PureBasic... Think about the guys who want to code online/network games based on the new 3DLibCommandSet! Maybe this could code great 3D games but it make no sence, if you cant use UDP for the games then!

I think Fred should take a look to the request/wishlist and hear to the users wishes... I mean the so long waited "Double" and "Correct Floats" support for example! Sure, its Fred choise! So i will never say that Fred *MUST* add something nor that he is our "SLAVE" !!!

I respect Fred´s work! But as Tranquil said, the best advertising is to spread the word and not the program


PIII450, 256MB Ram, 80GB HD + 6,4 GB, RivaTNT, DirectX8.1, SB AWE64, Win2000 + all Updates...

greetz
MrVainSCL! aka Thorsten

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

> Fred is may be the "boss" but we are the paying customers.

True, but just because you ate dinner at a restaurant doesn't give you
the right to tell the manager how to run it.


PB - Registered PureBasic Coder

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.

> True, but just because you ate dinner at a restaurant doesn't give you
> the right to tell the manager how to run it.

How does PureBasic relate to a manager running a restaurant? No one here is telling Fred how to run his software company. We are only requesting mew product features. The true analogy is to go into your favorite restaurant where you eat breakfast every morning and ask that your favorite beverage they do not serve to be added to the menu. There is nothing wrong with this.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

> No one here is telling Fred how to run his software company.

Somebody said: "It doesnt matter if Fred likes it or not". Maybe I
took it the wrong way, but saying that sounds a bit demanding to me,
even if it wasn't meant to be.

> How does PureBasic relate to a manager running a restaurant?
> The true analogy is to go into your favorite restaurant where you
> eat breakfast every morning and ask that your favorite beverage
> they do not serve to be added to the menu.

And do you honestly think the restaurant is going to keep adding new
drinks to the menu for every new customer that comes along asking?
Very unlikely. The customer doesn't run the restaurant, the manager
does; and he can only consider requests for new menu items, just like
PureBasic's author. That's how PureBasic relates to a restaurant.


PB - Registered PureBasic Coder

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.

> The customer doesn't run the restaurant, the manager
> does; and he can only consider requests for new menu items, just like
> PureBasic's author. That's how PureBasic relates to a restaurant.

That's all I ask. And if Microsoft ran the “restaurantâ€