Re: I resign

[Jan Ekholm <chakie@infa.abo.fi>]

On Tue, 3 Aug 1999, Christian Reiniger wrote:

>Jan Ekholm wrote:
>>Maybe, maybe not. Only problems are that I'm not exactly sure of what
>>needs to be done and what the ultimate goals for 'net are. I don't think I
>
>Remember the responses to your Zombie resignation mail? I think those are a
>good start. Reflect about the ideas expressed in them, about what networking
>is used for in the different kinds of games, about the special requirements
>of the different kinds of games, about what kind of toolkit would be most
>useful.
>Post your ideas to the list for discussion - there *are* interested people
>around.

There are so wildly many different aspects to implementing everything
needed in a networking toolkit. That was something wich became evident to
me when I read some of the comments I got when I told I'd stop developing
Zombie. As I'm no professional game-developer and I've never run into the
situations where that kind of functionality is needed, the more advanced
funtionality is missing. The question is AFAIK about the 'level' of the
toolkit. Should it be really high-level (Z is quite high), or should it
merely be a simple and fast abstraction over sockets?

For those who have looked at the Zombie docs and thought that the number
of classes in Z is overwhelming can have a new look at
http://infa.abo.fi/~chakie/zombie/. I've made a small classreference which
contains only the public classes, i.e. the ones the developer would
possibly need when developing Z-apps. That reduces the number to about 25%
of the total number of classes (public + internal). Of these are about
half 'event-classes' that are _very_ simple.

This is something I've planned on doing for a long time, and now I got
some spare time to do it.

---------------------+------------------------------------------------------
 Jan 'Chakie' Ekholm |    CS at Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland
    Linux Inside     | I'm the blue screen of death, no-one hears you scream