Joining the packet sources
#31
True.

It also happens when one would regenerate a chunk while that chunk is surrounded by players.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#32
Yeah, another corner-case Wink

Still, I decided to make this possible. It elegantly wraps the chunk serialization into a separate class, replacing the serialization in cPacket_MapChunk.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#33
There, it's done. Another phase finished, 3 done, 4 to go. Now for the more fun stuff.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#34
and when phase 4 is finished mc-server is compatible with 1.3.2 or is that another phase?
Reply
Thanks given by:
#35
It will take all 7 of those steps to get compatible with 1.3.1 (or 1.3.2, if it uses the same protocol)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#36
ok and 1.3.2 and 1.3.1 are using the same protocol.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#37
Half of the cPacket classes are gone (those that were S->C only) and are serialized now directly in the cProtocol125 class. Man, wasn't that a huuuuge change.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#38
Nice job man!Big Grin
Reply
Thanks given by:
#39
Another phase down - rev 802. cPackets are now all gone.

cProtocol125 is now more or less what I had planned for it to be; there are some tweaks I'd do, but those can be done later.

Now I'm gonna have a look at the 1.3.2 protocol. Especially the handshake, as I'd like to be able to detect between the two protocols transparently and have the ability to support both. If that it not possible, I'll just start a 1.3.2 protocol and there will be a compile-time switch, until it is ready.
Tomorrow. I keep working on MCServer too muchTongue
Reply
Thanks given by:
#40
Quote:Especially the handshake, as I'd like to be able to detect between the two protocols transparently and have the ability to support both. If that it not possible, I'll just start a 1.3.2 protocol and there will be a compile-time switch, until it is ready.
Why compile-time switch? Why not .ini key? (I mean, I can't imagine any case in which you can't have both protocols in server code, despite the ability to detect which one client is using)
Reply
Thanks given by:




Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)