Author Topic: Stepwise to Aurora II  (Read 5003 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline skeolan

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • s
  • Posts: 14
Stepwise to Aurora II
« on: September 24, 2011, 02:46:58 PM »
Hey Steve,

I just got to thinking about all the new code you're likely already writing, and the additional that you'll need to write, for the Newtonian reboot of Aurora I, and how once it all works you're likely going to want to port that over to Aurora II.   I wondered if you've considered doing all your greenfield development for BOTH revs of your software in modern VB or C# libraries? Interop between VB6 and .  NET assemblies is tricky but not impossible, and if it meant you could leverage new stuff like better installer code and newer interfaces/abstractions maybe it'd be worth the challenge to consider this approach. 

hxxp: msdn.  microsoft.  com/en-us/vbasic/ms788241
hxxp: www.  vbrad.  com/article.  aspx?id=46

If you refactor your code for, say, movement and intercept and fuel consumption calculations, or your basic system- and galaxy-generation algorithms so that certain pieces of it are implemented in . NET libraries, you could possibly wrap and invoke them from your VB6 environment and from the newer Aurora II CLR runtime.

Anyway I'm just wondering if you've given any thought to a sort of gradual movement away from VB6 for new development work, since I'm really intrigued by all the new work you're doing for the Newtonian mechanics but part of me is thinking "it's a shame this is going to have to be redone all over again for A-II. "
« Last Edit: September 24, 2011, 02:50:35 PM by skeolan »
 

Offline skeolan

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • s
  • Posts: 14
Re: Stepwise to Aurora II
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2011, 02:56:12 PM »
Oh and I just saw this reply on the older A-II thread that posits an interesting notion too:

hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php/topic,4103. msg40097. html#msg40097

Quote from: Antagonist
I am reminded what ToadyOne of Dwarf Fortress did with the OpenGL code.   He basically posted source of a MUCH older unrelated game which uses the same drawing engine as DF.   The community stepped in and OpenGL'fied the code, fixing it and improving its performance considerably, after which he took the resulting product and merged it with DF source, in the end keeping DF closed but still getting help from the community.

I wonder if that is possible with the Aurora and Aurora II UI?  If there isn't too much game logic in there is it possible to post it and have the community help and pretty it up, while keeping the backend (the interesting stuff) closed?  Particularly, I am thinking of the system and galaxy views.   This is a decisively non-artist game, but those two can still do with some love.

This.  Totally this! If there were closed assemblies maintained by the original designer but with published interfaces, they could be consumed by enthusiastic contributors to help build out new UI parts for Aurora II's frontend.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 6909
  • Thanked: 1663 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Stepwise to Aurora II
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2011, 02:18:15 PM »
Hey Steve,

I just got to thinking about all the new code you're likely already writing, and the additional that you'll need to write, for the Newtonian reboot of Aurora I, and how once it all works you're likely going to want to port that over to Aurora II.   I wondered if you've considered doing all your greenfield development for BOTH revs of your software in modern VB or C# libraries? Interop between VB6 and .  NET assemblies is tricky but not impossible, and if it meant you could leverage new stuff like better installer code and newer interfaces/abstractions maybe it'd be worth the challenge to consider this approach. 

hxxp: msdn.  microsoft.  com/en-us/vbasic/ms788241
hxxp: www.  vbrad.  com/article.  aspx?id=46

If you refactor your code for, say, movement and intercept and fuel consumption calculations, or your basic system- and galaxy-generation algorithms so that certain pieces of it are implemented in . NET libraries, you could possibly wrap and invoke them from your VB6 environment and from the newer Aurora II CLR runtime.

Anyway I'm just wondering if you've given any thought to a sort of gradual movement away from VB6 for new development work, since I'm really intrigued by all the new work you're doing for the Newtonian mechanics but part of me is thinking "it's a shame this is going to have to be redone all over again for A-II. "

I think some form of developing new functionality in libraries of a more modern language will be the eventual route to Aurora II. The reason for developing Newtonian Aurora in VB6 is that I am trying out some complex funcitonality at the moment and I don't want to have to think about the language I am writing in :)

Steve
 

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1459
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: Stepwise to Aurora II
« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2012, 07:14:07 AM »
Steve.

Concentrate over Aurora II and CLOSE old Aurora,bug or not..

Aurora II r ur child..NEW Child..

Am waitin for those.

1 year or 2..NP..but please go ahead : step forward.

happy New Project.
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52