Re: [DotGNU]A webservice game project ((TODO))

[Peter Minten]

Gopal V wrote:
> 
> If memory serves me right, Peter Minten wrote:
> > than the average test file :-). So far there are a few small examples of
> > specific areas (CGI, QT# with pnet),
> 
> Hmmm... I wouldn't call QMahjong a "small" example ... :)

It can be send through the mail, that qualifies it as a small example for me
:-).

> > * Programmable cards, the game cards must be able to do custom things.
> > The best way to implement this is IMHO embedded scripting. Scripting
> > is something we need to implement sometime anyway.
> 
> JScript !!! ... this is a nice way to demo out jscript embedding as well.

OK, I personally prefer Ruby as embedded language but jscript is easier to
implement.

Btw, would it be possible to create some sort of common interface to scripting
languages? All common scripting langs I know off have arrays, hashes, numbers
and strings. If we could create an interface for each language to tackle those 4
things flexible scripting would become a possibility.

IMHO it would be great if pnet wouldn't just support jscript, but Perl, Python,
Ruby, Tcl and Lua too.

> Minddog was suggesting an Xml IDE with pnet , that I think is more promising
> as it's a nice test of things ... And we do have to fix up the Jabber.net
> stuff before proceeding onto such things ...

All work and no play, that's boring ;-). Besides, a game is good for Public
Relations.

> A simple jabber message sent with Jabber.net might be an amazing demo of
> things... Especially combined with the fact that you could send JScript
> as plain text ;) and you have your first downloadable webapplication.

Let me be Joe Average here: "You can send a message using your application and
that's cool? I can send a thousand messages using Gabber. You can download a
script, I can do that with my browser. You can send a script in a Jabber
message, big deal.", it might be a milestone, but it's unlikely to be amazing to
the general public. I'm not saying such things aren't important, but we need to
capture the attention of the general public that doesn't really care about small
steps.

But let me stress again that I'm absolutely for making the demos you propose,
they are a large part of what we need to do (a smaller part is getting a
larger audience of course :-).

Greetings,

Peter