Thread for Devs and Coders

[the_pilgrim]

a thinner client could help.

How could the client possibly be thinner? It's pretty much a dumb terminal as it is.

I was thinking more along the lines of moving away from java local data storage, since it both wastes a lot of resources on the client side and it leaves an opportunity to read cached data. But I suppose that would require a fair amount of re-engineering. Perhaps the more practical approach is to just reduce the amount of data transmitted to the absolute minimum.

[loftar]

I was thinking more along the lines of moving away from java local data storage

You mean the JNLP cache? I only use it to cache loaded resources. I can't quite see what you imagine would improve by disusing it.

[the_pilgrim]

I was thinking more along the lines of moving away from java local data storage

You mean the JNLP cache? I only use it to cache loaded resources. I can't quite see what you imagine would improve by disusing it.

Let's just say that Java isn't well-known for maintaining a neat and predictable cache size. But for the most part, players can just clear the cache manually from time to time (which they do).

[loftar]

Let's just say that Java isn't well-known for maintaining a neat and predictable cache size. But for the most part, players can just clear the cache manually from time to time (which they do).

Certainly, I'm aware that the JNLP cache sucks quite a bit, and I would like to replace it per se. (I just haven't found a better way to cache data in a platform-independent manner.) You made it sound like it would make the client thinner, however, and I don't see how that makes sense. :)

[the_pilgrim]

Let's just say that Java isn't well-known for maintaining a neat and predictable cache size. But for the most part, players can just clear the cache manually from time to time (which they do).

Certainly, I'm aware that the JNLP cache sucks quite a bit, and I would like to replace it per se. (I just haven't found a better way to cache data in a platform-independent manner.) You made it sound like it would make the client thinner, however, and I don't see how that makes sense.

Yeah, I could've worded that better. The default client is pretty thin right now. The cache just tends to get fuck-huge from time to time for no good reason. But that part I blame mostly on Java and not on you guys. That's mostly why I avoid java for some of my newer web projects.

[jcm2214]

This thread wasn't meant solely for hnh purposes, but that's what it turned into.

[Tonkyhonk]

This thread wasn't meant solely for hnh purposes, but that's what it turned into.

I think this thread would have been more meaningful if you had actually started out with a topic.

[windmaker]

@loftar im imagining about what u say ...is like the bug of inventory 100x100 what can make it from client and not requires intervention from server?

Sorry, I just don't understand what you're saying. You still haven't explained how you thought TeckXKnight was wrong, though. ^^

well if u cant understand me with that words, i cant explain it with others, sorry, is my limitations of the comuncation.

and about "shit" word, the true is hard, probably u know it..

[DDDsDD999]

This thread wasn't meant solely for hnh purposes, but that's what it turned into.

You didn't say anything in the OP, the fact it had more than one page is pretty surprising. This thread was never about what you wanted.