Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Logs of chat: 8th june 04

Author
Message
Teh Go0rfmeister
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 00:40
Link
here you go:



Back to top
Profile PM Website
lagmaster
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Playing:
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 00:49
Link
where's the rest of it?

lagmasteruk - http://www.lagmaster.net is alive! http://www.dbforums.co.uk/ - another db forum!

Dark Snippet Pro V9.2 is out!!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
MikeS
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 00:50
Link
Here's my version. Might be a little more eye-friendly.

http://curvedbasic.dbspot.com/DBPchat2modified.htm

A book? I hate book. Book is stupid.
(Formerly known as Yellow)
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 00:51
Link
Thanks Froogle, Yellow . Sorry I didn't get a log online guys, real life jumped up with a mallet and it looks like it'd be unneccessary now

Back to top
Profile PM
Teh Go0rfmeister
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 01:00
Link
dam bug in forums

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Teh Go0rfmeister
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 01:00 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 01:02
Link
original log:

http://www.tinnedhead.dbspot.com/tg_convo_8june04.txt

Back to top
Profile PM Website
MikeS
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 01:05
Link
Tried to get rid of some of the junk from mine. Mine's just questions, but if you want to see the trout fighting see Froogle's.



http://curvedbasic.dbspot.com/DBPchat2modified.htm

A book? I hate book. Book is stupid.
(Formerly known as Yellow)
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 01:06 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 01:46
Link
Quote: "<lag> 40 of 48 Question from CattleRustler : When will VB6/VB.NET plugin developers have TPC drop-in access like C++ developers currently have, or will they?
* TheDarthster slaps koshi
<MikeJ> if you can make a regular DLL with VB6 then you shouldn't have any problems creating TPCs
<MikeJ> I have never used VB6 so don't know how it works
<MikeJ> as long as you can create a DLL and add in a string table you should be okay with it"


probably the worst answer I have ever seen. i would have respected an answer like "I have no clue what you mean, I didn't know vb guys make plugins for dbp, but I will forward your question to Lee". FYI: Newsletter 17, Item #9 or the image below

The answer not only was chock-full of "not giving a sh*t", it also pointed out the fact that the guy answering questions in the chat has no clue regarding dlls as they pertain to tpc's and the ramifications of ActiveX dll's - Not to further mention that I asked about bot vb6 AND .net and .NET has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with AX or COM!

I can guaruntee that there are more seasoned VB developers and altogether non-developers (prior exp) using DBP than there are C++ developers using it (think about it). To completely dismiss a community with that answer is total crap - and reminds of the same old "Snooty, holier than thou, C++ programmer looks-down-upon you attitude". I don't think that was MikeJ's intention but it's how it came off. "I don't know/use/or care about vb, therefore it doesn't matter what my answer is" - well guess what, it does when your customer base who pays your salary is probably full of us.

if this is an overreaction or a rant then please respond with Lee's email address and I will take it up with him.


* DBP_NETLIB_v1.2 - NOW WITH VARIABLE WATCHER! * Click Logo
Back to top
Profile PM
TheAbomb12
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Aug 2003
Location: Amist the blue skies...
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 01:14
Link
GOD DAMNIT- I missed it again!

Amist the Blue Skies...
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 01:20
Link
I'd just chalk it up as a lack of experience with VB and VB.NET. Although the answer did grate on my nerves just a little bit. I've had to wrestle with that DLL bear this year when writing an interface between some programs. It was not amusing.

BTW, I just got VB.NET 2003 Std Ed as a promo from MS. Is this worth installing on the home machine as a possible tool for writing PBEM tools and the like?
--
TAZ

History did not begin with PONG. -- Greg Costikyan

Game Beavers
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 02:15 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 02:15
Link
not sure what you mean by PBEM.

is anyone going to replace last chat's sticky with this one?


* DBP_NETLIB_v1.2 - NOW WITH VARIABLE WATCHER! * Click Logo
Back to top
Profile PM
Kain
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 03:25
Link
Quote: "4 of 24 Question from Kain : A lot of people feel needing the latest version of dx to run a game written in DBP is a big hinderance to selling it because a lot of people in the shareware market are not going to have the latest dx or be willing to download it just to play one game. Is there any chance of an ability to use older dx's since most of us don't even need the latest features anyway?

<MikeJ> using older interfaces for DirectX is a non starter really

<MikeJ> it would cause too many problems having to handle all of the different versions

<MikeJ> so unfortunately it's not something we can do
"



This is a real shame. They are crazy if they think most people will dl the latest direct x to play the so so games that 99% of us crank out. And A LOT of people don't have the latest dx. This is why you see so many major releases still sticking with DBC, I know I do.

This issue alone pretty much kills DBP in its ability to allow users to create a decent shareware game, but not many people seem to think about it.

[href]www.ShrikeSoftware.com[/href]

Free Demo: http://www.shrikesoftware.com/hijacker1.exe
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 04:11
Link
@CattleRustler:
Patience.
It'll not be quite the same as a native support but nearly.

Play Nice! Play Basic!
Back to top
Profile PM
TheAbomb12
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Aug 2003
Location: Amist the blue skies...
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 04:32
Link
Kain, Include DX with your instal file (if you have one)

Amist the Blue Skies...
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 04:33
Link
Empty, I hear ya. My anger was not because I received a valid answer that I didn't like - it's because I received a non-answer that didn't address the question, whatsoever. Pretty darn unpro if you ask me. I will most likely not attend any further chats, or at least won't ask anything, unless Lee is there fielding questions. No disrespect to Mike.


* DBP_NETLIB_v1.2 - NOW WITH VARIABLE WATCHER! * Click Logo
Back to top
Profile PM
Kain
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 04:34
Link
It was my understanding that software companies can't just distribute dx without the big M's permission?

[href]www.ShrikeSoftware.com[/href]

Free Demo: http://www.shrikesoftware.com/hijacker1.exe
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
DarkSin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jul 2003
Location: Under your bed
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 04:36
Link
@ Kain
You can but under the normal restrictions.. aka you are not selling it, bla bla bla... but yea you can distribute it as long as its the distrubtable version.


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 04:49
Link
@CattleRustler
Don't know. Mike is not responsible for the compiler part of DBpro, so he wouldn't know. And not using VB(.Net) isn't a crime.

Play Nice! Play Basic!
Back to top
Profile PM
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 07:35 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 07:36
Link
Quote: "Don't know. Mike is not responsible for the compiler part of DBpro, so he wouldn't know"


but he didn't say that. As far as I remember there was no restrictions or filters on the questions like: mike only answers this type, Ravey only answers that type, etc. Like I said, get LEE in there next time. Either way not an excuse for laming out on a paying customer.

Quote: "And not using VB(.Net) isn't a crime"


Never said it was, but I find it funny that our plugin was listed in the past news letter (item 9) but when I asked a question directly pertaining to the concept, it was completely lost onto those who where supposed to be able to answer the questions (see above for lack of filter notice)

again, no disrespect to Mike or anyone from TGC that takes time out to answer questions in the chat, but if there are some topics that you are not responsible for or can't answer, then either state them beforehand, or make sure you have the personel there that can answer them, directly and concisely. I sat there for 45 minutes waiting for a clear answer to my question and got exactly the opposite.

other than that - kudos


* DBP_NETLIB_v1.2 - NOW WITH VARIABLE WATCHER! * Click Logo
Back to top
Profile PM
Kain
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 07:43
Link
I feel like there must be some issue with including dx in a game you are selling. Otherwise I would think Mike would have said to just include it. I'll look into anyway, as its a pretty important issue.

http://www.ShrikeSoftware.com

Free Demo: http://www.shrikesoftware.com/hijacker1.exe
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
MikeS
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 07:54 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 07:55
Link
Who was it(I wanna say the_winch), who made a plug-in that was able to exclude .dll's from your program?

I think at the very least, TGC should provide someway to remove unnecessary .dll's at compliation time. Although, I could try to just temporarily move the .dll's each time I compile. That might either screw things up, or just be a pain.

Either way, I see where you're coming from Kain.

Example:
I've never needed multiplayer, ftp, vector, bsp ,mdl,md2,md3,particles, and occasionally no sound.

That's instantly 2 about 2mb off any .exe.



[EDIT] (I know you mean different DX versions, but moving unnecessary .dll's would also be a plus.)


A book? I hate book. Book is stupid.
(Formerly known as Yellow)
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 07:56
Link
I don't think the VB answer was that inappropriate, Mike doesn't know how the VB DLL's work (because he hasn't used VB, I'd assume) so he probably just made a guess at the answer, which was: if you can compile to a standard DLL and attach a string table then it will work. Of course VB6 DLL's will NEVER be able to do this because they're ActiveX and Lee would have to detect if the DLL is ActiveX and then initialize the COM interface from within the compiler and use it that way.

VB.NET is different though, it's built on the same framework as C++.NET (obviously) and since C++.NET DLL's can be used in DBP without a problem then we should be able to use VB.NET one's as well. The problem occurs when we have to attach a string table to the DLL, I don't believe this is possible in VB.NET at all so you'd have to hack the string table in manually. This might be possible and I have an idea on how you may be able to do it so I'll have a closer look later, even if you do though, you won't be able to access the global core pointer to return strings properly so there is a downside to it.

I guess Mike should have admitted that he really wasn't sure, but we must remember no one likes to admit they have no idea.


"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Kain
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 08:01
Link
Quote: "I guess Mike should have admitted that he really wasn't sure, but we must remember no one likes to admit they have no idea."


Good point exeat. Everyone makes mistakes. I think that maybe too big of a deal is being made of this, though I could understand why people would be upset.

http://www.ShrikeSoftware.com

Free Demo: http://www.shrikesoftware.com/hijacker1.exe
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 08:09
Link
Of course, considering the question still hasn't been answered. When will VB DLL's have the ability to be directly used with DBP? IMHO probably never, to my knowledge, no one that is a part of TGC has even used VB before so they wouldn't even know how to go about adding support for such a thing.


"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
DMXtra
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Aug 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 12:28
Link
Quote: "
This is a real shame. They are crazy if they think most people will dl the latest direct x to play the so so games that 99% of us crank out. And A LOT of people don't have the latest dx. This is why you see so many major releases still sticking with DBC, I know I do.

This issue alone pretty much kills DBP in its ability to allow users to create a decent shareware game, but not many people seem to think about it.
"


This isn't a big deal at all. Direct X 9 came out on December 2002, yeah thats right 2002. Its now 2004 and it will be 2005 in seven months. If you were to start now and work on your shareware program it wouldn't be until sometime in 2005 when you are finished.

By that time, everyone will have been playing Doom 3 (which will need a graphics card update), and Half Life 2 as well as Halo PC, Tomb Raider PC, EverQuest II, and just about every other PC game will have been DX 9 for a long time.

If people don't play any of the newer store bought games,they don't play games at all or they only play them on a console like Xbox or PS2 anyway.

Direct X Next (Direct X 10) is due out very late 2005 or early 2006 so its not like DX 9 is all that new. Three years for DX 9 and thats fine in my book.

You think DBPro has bugs now, just imagine adding in the bugs from DX 7 and then DX 9, which is entirely massive issue of support and then add on top of that video card driver bugs that has problems with both of them.

The real solution is this:

Use DBClassic for shareware puzzle games or Blitz Plus.
Use DBPro for everything else.

Its not that hard.

Dark Basic Pro - The Bedroom Coder's Language of choice for the 21st Century.
Back to top
Profile PM
DMXtra
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Aug 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 12:34
Link
Quote: "
Empty, I hear ya. My anger was not because I received a valid answer that I didn't like - it's because I received a non-answer that didn't address the question, whatsoever. Pretty darn unpro if you ask me. I will most likely not attend any further chats, or at least won't ask anything, unless Lee is there fielding questions. No disrespect to Mike.
"


Mountain, meet moe hill.

Honestly, he probably hasn't used Visual Basic all that much. VB should produce .dll's like C++, but it doesn't so I am sure he thought it did. Honestly, I use VB DOT NET at work and I don't think this is a big deal at all.

Since you know the answer to the question already, I don't see the problem.

Dark Basic Pro - The Bedroom Coder's Language of choice for the 21st Century.
Back to top
Profile PM
DMXtra
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Aug 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 12:37
Link
Quote: "
Of course, considering the question still hasn't been answered. When will VB DLL's have the ability to be directly used with DBP? IMHO probably never, to my knowledge, no one that is a part of TGC has even used VB before so they wouldn't even know how to go about adding support for such a thing.
"


Of course they won't add it in, why should they? There are lots more important things that are much more of a priority and besides Cattle has this working already. Why re-invent the wheel?

Dark Basic Pro - The Bedroom Coder's Language of choice for the 21st Century.
Back to top
Profile PM
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 14:34
Link
Quote: "as they pertain to tpc's and the ramifications of ActiveX dll's"

Its quite possible that Mike haven't not used VB, wouldn't know about the problems with using VB...

Shame you wont be able to come over to the convention really...


The place for wonderful plug-ins and things.
Keep your friends close, and your cats even closer.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ravey
Retired TGC Developer
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Nov 2002
Location: Southern TGC Nerve Centre
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 14:56
Link
May I politely point out that Mike and myself gave up our own free time to come into that chatroom. Baring this in mind I think any mention of "not giving a s***" is quite unfair and untrue.

Regards,
Dave Milton
Check out my games: Diode, Root, Binman & Skateboard Crazy
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 14:58
Link
Quote: "Of course they won't add it in, why should they? There are lots more important things that are much more of a priority and besides Cattle has this working already. Why re-invent the wheel?"


For the exact same reason they're supporting TPC DLL's at all, as Third Party Command authors we are essentially building a portion of the product for them. There are quite a few VB developers here that would be willing to write DLL's for DBP as long as they were supported.

The system we use to get VB DLL's working in DBP at the moment isn't ideal, CattleRustler has to write the DLL and then send it to me so I can wrap each and every one of his functions in a C++ DLL that can be used with DBP, this takes time and effort and is a disconvenience as every update CR wants to make to his DLL has to go to me first before he can upload it. Then there's the fact that the VB DLL has to be manually placed in the project file of anyone who wishes to use it as well.

Reinventing the wheel? Hardly, if they really don't have a clue on how to get VB DLL's working then they can quite easily email myself and I'd be happy to explain to them the very simple procedure.


"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 15:03 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 15:04
Link
Unfortunately VB and VC are only compatiable at COM level. I double Lee and/or Mike want to start adding in COM interfaces so that VB users can write native plug-ins.

Ravey - hows the training going ? Are they getting you to make them teas ?!


The place for wonderful plug-ins and things.
Keep your friends close, and your cats even closer.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Mike Johnson
TGC Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 15:11
Link
As I said at the time I haven't used VB before so don't know how it works. It's not that I don't have a clue as to how the TPC DLLs work - it's simply that I don't know how VB DLLs are created and have never tried them with DB Pro. That's why I gave the answer I did. And it's not a case of ignoring VB - it's just I don't know the language so I can't answer specific questions on it.

Now if there is a particular problem with using VB created DLLs in DB Pro then it would have helped if you would have mentioned this in your question and I may have been able to offer some assistance on that. You need to be more specific about what you're asking. If you want to class it as a non answer fair enough but maybe you should have asked the question in a different way. Now I can see there are problems with VB DLLs then why don't you send me emails and talk about how you create them and what problems you're having. Then I can help you.

Mike
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the_winch
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Feb 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 15:18
Link
Quote: " Who was it(I wanna say the_winch), who made a plug-in that was able to exclude .dll's from your program?"


Not a pluging just a simple app that can move the dlls out of the compiler\plugins dir before you compile to stop the compiler putting them in the exe.

Also a few of the replacment ides have the option built in. JaPROe and darkriders ide I think.

It depends which commands you are using, sometimes the compiler will not inculde any unnessicary dlls. You can save a bit of size by converting to .dbo and removing the conv*.dll files.

can i scream
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Ravey
Retired TGC Developer
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Nov 2002
Location: Southern TGC Nerve Centre
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 15:22
Link
TCA - I've cracked the tea making, I have now progressed to making sandwitches (only ham at present but soon to expand into cheese).

Regards,
Dave Milton
Check out my games: Diode, Root, Binman & Skateboard Crazy
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 15:25
Link
Cheese can be a real pain to deal with...


The place for wonderful plug-ins and things.
Keep your friends close, and your cats even closer.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Mike Johnson
TGC Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 15:27
Link
Ravey is still struggling to come to terms with the cheese grater. We're hoping that in a few months he'll have it cracked.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 15:34
Link
@Ravey " Hehee, so you were promoted from Starbucks Gopher then? "

well this beside i think actually what many of you seem to be forgetting is that Language Specific stuff like COM & ActiveX is actually Lee's dept. not Mikes'.
As Mike did say last time we all had one of these chats, that the compiler stuff is purely Lee's domain so he can't say either way on certain things.

What you need to bitch... erm i mean... request a feature for is the 3D Engine; as that is Mike's domain.

I distintly remember that Visual Basic can export as an ActiveX or COM DLL correct? Now you can call COM based functions directly from DB/DBP - provided they are marked as export/import using PASCAL/C StdCall (rather than VB's standard CDeclaration).
What's really VBs' biggest enemy here is the fact it uses full OO which means most developers tend not to ever dabble with the low-level stuff.

For the actual program you don't have to but you'll have to wrapper most of the OO/Class functions with the standard call exporting.
Failing that; manually setup the string table, that's what i do with PureBASIC... never had any problems.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 15:43 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 15:44
Link
Quote: "As Mike did say last time we all had one of these chats, that the compiler stuff is purely Lee's domain so he can't say either way on certain things."

Thats why I usually mention both of them - at least then I've got a 50% chance of being right half the time.

Quote: "Ravey is still struggling to come to terms with the cheese grater. We're hoping that in a few months he'll have it cracked. "

Yes, getting fingers in the way can be a problem... Mind you, you could always do what my sister does most of the time, and delegate...


The place for wonderful plug-ins and things.
Keep your friends close, and your cats even closer.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 17:03
Link
Quote: "Now you can call COM based functions directly from DB/DBP - provided they are marked as export/import using PASCAL/C StdCall (rather than VB's standard CDeclaration)."

No. Com based DLLs are completely different to standard DLLs. While standard DLLa export addresses to functions, ActiveX DLLs expose references to objects. It has nothing to do with the calling convention.

Play Nice! Play Basic!
Back to top
Profile PM
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 19:09
Link
@MikeJ and Ravey: I stated many times that I meant no offense or disrespect, and that I do appreciate the fact that people from tgc are taking the time to field questions in the chat. I am not trying to personally attack anyone and I am guilty, on occasion, of making a mountain out of a moe-hill Anyway, my original question:

Quote: "When will VB6/VB.NET plugin developers have TPC drop-in access like C++ developers currently have, or will they?"


was just that. When can I, as a vb.net programmer (or others as vb6/net developers) simply write and compile a dll, and drop it into the dbp Plugins-User directory and have it work, like c++ can do currently?

I only mention VB6 to help champion the cause, I am really only personally concerned with .net but it would be nice to see both supported - Let us not forget that vb6 is COM/AX where VB.NET is not (although .net supports ComInterop for backwards compatibility). If tgc were to implement easy vb dll support it would probably require two vastly different methods as com/ax and .net are vastly different.


* DBP_NETLIB_v1.2 - NOW WITH VARIABLE WATCHER! * Click Logo
Back to top
Profile PM
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 19:12
Link
the physics system sounds interesting


Formerly known as "DarkWing Duck"
Back to top
Profile PM Email
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 19:13
Link
I cant see it happening really... The amount of extra work would be awful...


The place for wonderful plug-ins and things.
Keep your friends close, and your cats even closer.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Mike Johnson
TGC Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 19:45
Link
CattleRustler - What problems are you having with VB DLLs in DB Pro? I don't know what the differences are between VB DLLs and VC DLLs. You'll need to help me out on this and provide some information as I know very little about VB.

Mike
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 19:54 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 19:58
Link
Quote: "I don't know what the differences are between VB DLLs and VC DLLs. You'll need to help me out on this and provide some information as I know very little about VB."

The difference is, that VB doesn't produce standard DLLs but ActiveX/Com DLLs. Dot NET DLLs can be accessed like COM/AX DLLs ('cause the OS provides a wrapper for this).

The Windows API provides a wide range of functions to access AX/COM DLLs. As I've posted previously, instead of retrieving function pointers, you can get references to Objects in a AX/COM DLL, detailed information on their properties and methods, parameters types and names and so on.

Play Nice! Play Basic!
Back to top
Profile PM
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 19:58
Link
Quote: "They are crazy if they think most people will dl the latest direct x to play the so so games that 99% of us crank out. "


I don't understand this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most people download the newest DirectX to play real commercial games??

Also, there is NO issue with releasing the DirectX distro with your game. None.

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 21:11
Link
no issue cept the fact that ya know it'll add 7-16mb to the distro; that said with dbp game sizes, i doubt most people will notice

Quote: "Com based DLLs are completely different to standard DLLs. While standard DLLa export addresses to functions, ActiveX DLLs expose references to objects. It has nothing to do with the calling convention."


BAHHPP! Your second post was more on the ball.
Visual Basic exports both COM and/or ActiveX (VC++ can export 5 distinct types and actually as DBP is Single Threaded you cannot use the features of a Multi-Thread DLL and if you try to DBP cannot see what your accessing without setting up your own thread interface in the DLL which just add headaches so best to forget for now)

ActiveX uses a System Wrapper, as it can use a Control System; COM doesn't not though... all a COM DLL is, basically is an unexported function set which can be attached to Windows as a floating object.

Kinda like if you use ImportLibrary( ) you can instantly use all of the commands within it, so what Windows does is just do the Import/Export on all of the libraries when calls are accessed (as it loads the calls into memory on boot up)...

Effectively all that is missing from COM DLLs is just the Export Calls; which is why you can access them (but not ActiveX/.NET ones) using the standard Load DLL and Call DLL commands.

As i said earlier if i recall there is a way in VB to setup the export calls so that rather than being attached to a COM Export you can set them to PASCAL _STDCALL (dunno why but Microsoft stuff is laden with Pascal compatibility) which means that although you can have a COM structure you also are given standard Extern "C" Exports.

You can't do this with ActiveX and .Net because they use exclusively the GUID based system which the system calls; COM doesn't (COM is C-Compatible, ActiveX and .NET aren't)

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 21:25
Link
Oh dear, Raven... I don't know where to start..

Quote: "ActiveX uses a System Wrapper, as it can use a Control System; COM doesn't not though... all a COM DLL is, basically is an unexported function set which can be attached to Windows as a floating object."

Oh, please. What is COM

Quote: "Kinda like if you use ImportLibrary( ) you can instantly use all of the commands within it, so what Windows does is just do the Import/Export on all of the libraries when calls are accessed (as it loads the calls into memory on boot up)..."

?

Quote: "Effectively all that is missing from COM DLLs is just the Export Calls; which is why you can access them (but not ActiveX/.NET ones) using the standard Load DLL and Call DLL commands."

You can't. (See 1st reply)


Quote: "As i said earlier if i recall there is a way in VB to setup the export calls so that rather than being attached to a COM Export you can set them to PASCAL _STDCALL (dunno why but Microsoft stuff is laden with Pascal compatibility) which means that although you can have a COM structure you also are given standard Extern "C" Exports.
"

?


Quote: "You can't do this with ActiveX and .Net because they use exclusively the GUID based system which the system calls; COM doesn't (COM is C-Compatible, ActiveX and .NET aren't)"

?


Most of your sentences don'T make any sense at all.

Play Nice! Play Basic!
Back to top
Profile PM
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 21:26
Link
Mike, thanks - hopefully the nice people above this have explained the problem, because I couldn't have explained it like that

All I know is how to write vb/vb.net code, I don't know c/c++ or know much of the innards of windows or dlls or all that jazz. I am spoiled. I just want to write a vb.net dll that doesn't need a c++ wrapper (no offense exeat) and just drop it in and have dbp use it.

I guess this is very insanely difficult and am asking about this from to simplistic a point of view. Sorry. But without knowing all the innards like I said, no one can say this is impossible. Nothing is impossible. Ask Exeat about our variable watcher in our plugin - we had it working for a month before it was released because it was seemingly impossible to get a vb.net form to play nice with DBP - but in the end we got it done.

I hold out hope that some clever tgc programmer will sit down and get this vb compatibility thing worked out - although I know it is not high on anyone's list.

I did plant a seed in Lee's head a while back when he did that weekend thread thing if anyone remembers. I asked him about this exact topic and he seemed "interested" - maybe someone can ask him if he remembers or show him this thread <shivers>


* DBP_NETLIB_v1.2 - NOW WITH VARIABLE WATCHER! * Click Logo
Back to top
Profile PM
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 21:40 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 21:43
Link
@Raven: In this case, PASCAL has almost nothing to do with the language and everything to do with memory addressing and organization. It's a very old spec, I was using it in Borland Turbo C probably before you were born.
--
TAZ

[edit for grammar]

History did not begin with PONG. -- Greg Costikyan

Game Beavers
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 9th Jun 2004 21:45 Edited at: 9th Jun 2004 21:45
Link
Yeah that's about calling conventions (in which order function parameters are put on the stack and how to clean up the stack afterwards)

Play Nice! Play Basic!
Back to top
Profile PM
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-09-22 07:42:40
Your offset time is: 2024-09-22 07:42:40