Ernesto Perez

PeterCanessa Oh wrote: Hi again Ernesto. you are way beyond most of the things we care to discuss here. The viewer functionality is documented and discussed in the open-source area of the wiki but the LL server is proprietary and not published. We know you don't like the open-source stuff but that's where it's at if you want to go beyond basic scripting. Like it or not, LL is unlikley to give you all their secrets Question isnt do I like open-source or not. You itself sayes in some previous thread (if I remember correctly) that writing 3rd party viewer isnt so easy and LL specially made it hard to do. Of course its hard, because reading some other programmer written source code is always hard and errors possibility is high, even more if source isnt well documented. And we all see this also in inworld - in SL good-working BOT's are very few, some five or something and they all are only for limited specific functionality. If you write your own viewer-BOT, then it becomes only YOUR software that does some operation, other programmers cant use it to make their own BOT's - you make software, but programmers need SDK. Also you can study this source-code very hard, every day, but anyway we dont see result, SDK result that other programmers can use to write their own BOT software.

I think for making BOT's, better idea is to use standard viewer with mouse/keyboard drive robot-macros than write own 3rd party viewer. Example standard viewer runs in some machine 24/7 and all operations translated to mouse/keyboard macros. Central control point becomes SDK for programmers with class-libraries. Programmers make some class object, class constructors start moving mouse into correct menu row and class functions continue with operation and finish mouse/keyboard macro. All functions must contain control mechanism, to find out does mouse really goes into right place and does operation really finish as expected and if not, made correction to mouse movement. Class-libraries becomes SDK plaftorm for programmers that allows to use any operation that also viewer allows, without limitations to BOT functionality. Also in this case there isnt any meaning are LL viewer and server side functionality documented or not documented at all.

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 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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

Hi! Exist some libraries for MS VisualStudio 2010 Ultimate to write BOT's or add-on's to viewer2?

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).