Because that isn't pointless and is definitely the best feature ever... lolQuote:
Originally Posted by ovflowd
Printable View
Because that isn't pointless and is definitely the best feature ever... lolQuote:
Originally Posted by ovflowd
+1 for Jonteh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonteh
You guys need to decide what libraries you want to use and keep it that way.
Quality is better then quantity and that defiantly applies to programming.
Ditch DotNetty, stick with SuperSockets.
Although I do get why you have both, different socket libraries, different architecture. So I am in no way agreeing with Jonty.
Eh... Ever heard of interfaces? Hello... This is 2016. 2004 called they want their procedural code back.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaden83
Nevermind, the ability of the end-user to choose which library he want to use is great. Also the libraries goes through an unified implementation, so doesn't matter if you choose SS or DN...Quote:
Originally Posted by The General
Obviously in my opinion DotNetty is better, but have some glitches yet..
Different arch? So what you are saying is that some server or computer hardware may not support SuperSockets or DotNetty?Quote:
Originally Posted by jaden83
Why use either? Is it really that damn complicated to build a socket class using System.Net.Sockets? I'm just guessing but I'm assuming that, as opposed to a library, there should be zero question about the availability of that class.
Performance is really better with reactive socket libraries and NIO socket libraries.Quote:
Originally Posted by FullmetalPride
- - - Updated - - -
No, but DotNetty is still under development. SuperSocket and DotNetty have performance differences. Test yourself. DotNetty is quick to handle sockets. SuperSocket is fast to handle and send messages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonteh
Try thinking of it as an open-source project rather than an emulator for a second. Seems to make your statement about compatibility a tad invalid disregarding the fact that no one spoke on it (except you) anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonteh
No, that's not what I'm saying.
https://github.com/kerryjiang/SuperSocket
https://github.com/Azure/DotNetty
Yup 10/10 100% same source, same software design, same everything! illuminati confirmed 2016. sarcasm
New commits at Yupi!
Also you can download the Complete SWF Pack by cliking here
And you can download the standalone Client.php by clicking here
To login in into client use: http://localhost?id=1, ID = user Id, but in the Test Scenario only one static user is inserted.
You can see full changelog here
Linux branche works ?Quote:
Originally Posted by ovflowd
No. It's totally alpha. Read the answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthologique
"Although I do get why you have both, different socket libraries, different architecture. So I am in no way agreeing with Jonty."Quote:
Originally Posted by jaden83
Different socket libraries, different arch. So yes, someone else did bring it up (you). Simply wondered why he used two different socket libraries, nothing wrong with that bro.
Watch your sodium chloride levels, son.
Go is after 2004 and it is indeed procedural, C is procedural and predates your birth. It's not about what the cool kids are using these days, it's about use the right tool for the right job. Stop spouting anything that comes out of your rear just to sound intelligent.Quote:
Originally Posted by The General
Nice emu! good Luck, u have a hotel test?