Libraries for Visual Studio?

[Ernesto Perez]

Hello! I have now MS Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate installed. Do I need to use only integrated libraries or exist also some special libraries (or source) for C# or C++, to write something to SL? Example communication between SL HTTP service and IIS, storing SL info about visitors in MSSQL, writing interactive web-apps to drive ORB's, or writing BOT's.  

I know better C++ than C# , but unfortunately for web-apps and ASP.NET I can use only C#. But instead for BOT software and for information communication and storing I should prefer C++. All those C#  'interface' and 'delegate' commands are for me little confusing and I think C++ 'class-templates' and 'function-templates' are more than enough for writing good understable and dynamic code (C# makes reading code too confusing). 

 

[Void Singer]

There is no support for writing lsl scripts in any other language than LSL. There may at some future time be support for C#, but that project is currently on hold indefinitely.

ETA:
I've put in a moderator request to have this thread moves to the LSL Scripting forum. (and it was, YAY!)

LSL scripting Library is for sharing existing scripts of your own making ONLY.

[Ernesto Perez]

You get me absolutely wrong. I dont want to write jet in inworld in C#, but instead I want to write in C++ or C# software off-world for SL - to communicate with SL through HTTP, exchange information between SL and IIS, store information into MSSQL, write BOT viewers, cantrol all this with interactive web-application etc. This all is very important for SL to become even better virtual platform. Example most serious things you cant program in LSL in inworld at all, but instead you must program it in viewer side (BOT's example). If you write software in viewer side, you cant say anymore that LSL dont allow you to do one or another, all is then possible and you can also use C++ or C#. The question is - exist for that also libraries or I must start from beginning. Example to study some viewer source code is not very rational job. This wastes too much time and its not worth of it. The real point is in documentation. Documentation is even more important than libraries. LSL is very well documented, its just perfect, compared example with some freeware or Linux documentation. But you must understand that SL is not only LSL - there is much to do also off-world, example web-applications. SL is already growed from inworld to outside world, into RL. 

[Void Singer]

unfortunately there is very little documentation, and most of the documentation is written by residents...(almost all LSL documentation is written by residents)

the documentation that does exist for the viewer source code can be found through this page

[Ernesto Perez]

thanx, I see. Exaxtly this is mistake that fundamental level documentation and libraries are written by 3rd party programmers. And source code is more like hacking, not good programming practice. Source code can be only for examples, main work must done with libraries and documentation. Example Microsoft gives for developers very good start platform with detailde documentation in MSDN, SDK, DDK, and very good starting point from side of class libraries, MFC, ASP.NET etc.  This dont mean that Microsoft itself writes software, developers write all software instead. I see the real case of need is to make this kind of developers plaftform for MS Visual Studio, C++ (C#) and ASP.NET, because the real programming platform is still Visual Studio and not some Linux, PHP, Java, Perl or whatever. Otherwise developing stay in hacking level and is not seriouly get thing. 

[Void Singer]

the problem is that LL is not providing a kit to make your own, they are showing you how they made theirs, which is a different concept. and they are doing it for free.

they have no reason or interest in making it easy to build your own.

[Ernesto Perez]

Ok, but I still dont get why LL isnt interested about it. Why Microsoft is interested about it?  Reason is to get more developers for Windows platform, to become bigger environment. LL must also be interested about when SL becomes more powerful virtual environment with more software, more developers and more users who buy software, pay for LL lands, buy from marketplace where LL gets some percent from every sell etc.. If LL just dont have power to make good developing platform in libraries and documentation, then no problem, I dont need it for free, I can pay also for it.  And I see that LL itself also dont write software. One viewer and one virtual environment isnt jet software developing. Even Microsoft cant write all software itself.  LSL is good done for developers, but the time is over to only stay in LSL, its in-world thing, but future goes also to outside world. 

 

[Void Singer]

 

---

Ernesto Perez wrote:

Ok, but I still dont get why LL isnt interested about it. Why Microsoft is interested about it?

---

 

because Microsoft makes it hard to use another system... so everything you make is built on top of microsofts products (which they make money from)

but LL does not have that same benefit... if they make it easy for you make a viewer, you can use that viewer anywhere, so it is not built on top of LL's product (SL), and they make no money from it (because it's open source). The ONLY benefit they get, is new idea and fixes that they can use, which does not happen if they sell it, or if they close it only works on their product.

[Ernesto Perez]

---

Void Singer wrote:

 because Microsoft makes it hard to use another system... so everything you make is built on top of microsofts products (which they make money from)

but LL does not have that same benefit... if they make it easy for you make a viewer, you can use that viewer anywhere, so it is not built on top of LL's product (SL), and they make no money from it (because it's open source). The ONLY benefit they get, is new idea and fixes that they can use, which does not happen if they sell it, or if they close it only works on their product.

---

I dont need this LL "open source". What benefit I get from that "source code"? Do I ever look that source code? Thanks, I have better to do with my time than look some other programmer whole (not just examples) source code, fix errors or copy-paste it into my compiler. I better write my own code. And when its not open, only present in libraries, then there isnt possible that I can use my viewer in some other virtual environment than SL.

 

 

[PeterCanessa Oh]

[Darkie Minotaur]

Just what I thought, Peter. But I have to admit, the opening he turned to was quite subtle - I was tempted to believe our well known (and dearly missed) troll friend wnted a serious discussiin here. But, alas, the third reply revealed the ugly grimace. Keep it up Ernesto - some hundret more attemps and you may have learned to pull off a real amusing troll atack

[PeterCanessa Oh]

Well known, as you say.  This guy's logic really is impressive though.  I particularly loved, "You're all crap programmers because you aren't big companies and only big companies can write good software.  I know because I'm not a big company and I haven't written any good software.  I know you're not big companies because you don't charge enough for your crap.  If you do charge enough you're a greedy facist and should live in a socialist country where we don't have any money - by government order!".

But, yeah, if I hadn't recognised the tone in the second post I would have fallen for it too.  Then I looked at the name and thought .. noooo!  he's here!

[Darkie Minotaur]

*snickers* The OP's logic nicely compressed n just a few lines makes mi dizzy and feel a srong urge for some gin tonic.

[Ernesto Perez]

Seems that so called "open source" developers know only one word "troll". If I say honestly, I dont need your open source crap and never put it into my compiler. And if you continue thinkink in the same way, you never make something usable in programming except only crap and never stop natter that LSL dont allow one and other. LSL is pretty good, only you dont have imagination to write something interesting. I just dont see at all something useful at this moment in software area that I should want also use myself.

[Void Singer]

 

---

Ernesto Perez wrote:

I dont need this LL "open source". What benefit I get from that "source code"? Do I ever look that source code? Thanks, I have better to do with my time than look some other programmer whole (not just examples) source code, fix errors or copy-paste it into my compiler. I better write my own code. And when its not open, only present in libraries, then there isnt possible that I can use my viewer in some other virtual environment than SL.

---

 

not everything is done for you... it's not our problem if you don't like the answer, but it's still the correct answer. and seriously, if you can write better code then why are you whining about it to us? no one is going to cater to you whims just because you want them to.... that's not how the world works.

 

@Peter & Darkie:
Spoilsports, I was having fun =P

[Ernesto Perez]

---

Void Singer wrote:

 not everything is done for you... it's not our problem if you don't like the answer, but it's still the correct answer. and seriously, if you can write better code then why are you whining about it to us? no one is going to cater to you whims just because you want them to.... that's not how the world works.

 

---

The world works in this way - until platform author dont make programming SDK with libraries for some bigger compiler-linker, platform author dont get also more developers. They get only "open source" hacking kids who just round and round around the same code without software products grow. Because no any programmer who earn big money in RL (example with Visual Studio) dont start bore with some source code and also for free. This is only kids job. I wasnt sayed that I write better code and can program all myself. No. I want to write my own code, not others, regardless how much. If that isnt possible, then also there isnt any reason why I must bore with it at all and just get next job that better fits with my Visual Studio. There isnt just need to write all code itself. Good programming practice is not to write something that was already written, not bother with some unknown source code, instead write itself and if you cant write as much then you dont need, use only well done hierarchycal libraries (classes, not just plain imperative code). If you like imperative programming, then better is to forget about SL at all and get some assembler and write some embedded system.

 

 

[Darkie Minotaur]

 

---

Void Singer wrote:

@Peter & Darkie:

Spoilsports, I was having fun =P

---

 

 

*covers his insolent mouth with his paws and hides in a dark corner*

[Void Singer]

there can be no SDK when there is no software to develop, plain and simple... only a low level scripting language, with very basic http API's.... neither of which is rocket science to figure out.... and if you think they need their own SDK for something that's already written in common languages, then your every breath is wasted.

[Darkie Minotaur]

*snickers and wonders why Void should have highlighted the word 'wasted'*

[PeterCanessa Oh]

Just in case anyone serious is reading this thread and wondering about the things Ernesto is asks:

SL is not a software development tool or environment such as Visual Studio, nor is it offered as such.  The tools we have are for developing and enhancng content IN SL, with limited communication facilities for external systems.  Server-side code is completely hidden from us, being LL proprietary.

Anyone wanting to develop external systems integrating SL functionality has two options:

1. Directly, using the open-source viewer code.  With this you can write bots or other programs that interact with SL as if through an avatar.  You still won't get sudden superpowers like miles-wide sims or unlimited prims.  All that is controlled by LL's servers.  What you do get is the ability to control exactly how that interaction takes place and full access to all the communications available.  For instance, all the avatars in a sim are communicated to the viewers so some TPVs have sim-wide 'radar' without the need for scripts or prims.
2. Indirectly, via llHTTPRequest()/llHTTPResponse.  These provide an easy means to communicate with web servers, which could be your own systems doing 'whatever'.  They HTTP communications to/from SL is limited in a number of ways, however.  First, the SL side remains completely under the control - and timing - of LL's US-based servers.  You are also subject to the limitations of LSL to do anything with/about the message in SL, such as having a 2k limit on data received.

For people wishing to develop their own viewer code - see the open source portal on the wiki (or wherever it's moved to now).  LL neither sell nor promote this and get nothing out of it, so they have no particular interest in making it easy for you or, indeed, the Ernestos of the world.  Least of all him, perhaps, since that's just opening the door for all sorts of garbage to hit their servers at the speed of data.  Support and assistance for the viewer code is, to be honest, well outside the experience of most of the people you'll find here, even if not our abilities (personally, I've never even looked at the viewer code).

More of us will cope with the limits of LSL by linking to web servers.  That's easier, simpler and well documented on the SL side but you will need to know how to set-up and run a program on your server.  Usually, because it's free, people use some variation of LAMP/WAMP (Linux/Windows, Apache web-server, MySQL database, PHP programming language).  Help and support for these is usually beyond us here too, but only because of time/cost.  There is a world of difference between talking about the best way to make an SL online-indicator and helping someone create an ecommerce site you can neither see nor configure.

Summary:

• LSL - for things in SL
•   - via HTTP to web-servers: create what you like there
• Viewer code to change the way the client looks/works (within limits allowed by LL servers)

Beyond the first, it's not LL's, and mostly not our, interest or concern.

[Rolig Loon]

Of course, one might also make the obvious observation that this is a scripting forum, not a software development forum.   Side discussions about other things are interesting, perhaps, but it doesn't make much sense to waste energy yelling about them with someone who isn't paricularly interested in scripting.

[Ernesto Perez]

---

PeterCanessa Oh wrote:

.... 

---

Yes, thanx, it was very clear answer. I was knowed it also, only suspected maybe LL really goed some steps forward and made some SDK.....but seems not. So, no problem, I then start try HTTPrequest method. Altough viewer method is much more powerful, I just cant abandon my principles to write structured code with help of class-libraries, instead source code copy-paste.  Example with help of BOT you can write software that sends live video from inworld to some website etc.

 

---

PeterCanessa Oh wrote:

, with limited communication facilities for external systems. 

---

Exactly this is stuck into present tense. LL just dont want to understand that SL can be much more than just inworld virtual world. SL can fully interact with all RL software and databases. And of course it also means big money for LL. Example can make inworld connection with commercial or government databases. But LL server source code dont interst me, me interest well done class-libraries for SDK

......ok, I think this topic can close now, all is clear.

 

 

 

 

[Void Singer]

@Darkie:
so much for subtle

@Peter:
a well reasoned and balanced analysis

@Rolig:
but does it draw a little bit of attention to our humble home and help jumpstart participation?

@Ernesto:
No resident can do anything to change what resources are being offered by LL for SL. Complaining to anyone else about it is not going to accomplish anything. The best we can do is point you to what is available. usually people say thank you for that.