Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Use Trait for sending/receiving packets #36

Closed
wants to merge 11 commits into from
Closed

Use Trait for sending/receiving packets #36

wants to merge 11 commits into from

Conversation

lucaspoffo
Copy link
Owner

Another attempt to try making #10 possible.

The idea of this PR is to gather what Trait would be most suitable for WASM support and UDP at the same time.
By default, renet will have the UdpTransport available in the main library. For other types like Wasm/Steam/.. it would be on a separate create.

@lucaspoffo lucaspoffo marked this pull request as draft August 9, 2022 21:51
@lucaspoffo lucaspoffo mentioned this pull request Aug 9, 2022
Open
@lucaspoffo lucaspoffo mentioned this pull request Aug 28, 2022
Closed
@lucaspoffo
Copy link
Owner Author

lucaspoffo commented Sep 16, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Testing the Trait with the steamworks::NetworkingMessages and it seems to work well. Created a simple echo demo using the SteamTransport and the Steam Lobby API. It needs some fixes on the steamworks-rs side but overall seems good enough for a simple game.

@lucaspoffo lucaspoffo force-pushed the master branch 3 times, most recently from d5f71f1 to 7bb390f Compare November 18, 2022 19:33
@lucaspoffo lucaspoffo mentioned this pull request Nov 30, 2022
Closed
@FelixSelter
Copy link

How can one help you with this?

@zicklag
Copy link

zicklag commented Dec 5, 2022

I started to test this out and ran into a minor change I needed ( #50 ), but otherwise, I think this was going to work for my use case.

I ended up changing direction though and didn't end up targeting WASM or using Renet, so I don't have a concrete use of it.

tl;dr: This looked pretty much ready to use from my perspective, and might be fine to merge ( other than accounting for Sync + Send bounds with #50 or an alternative ).

@lucaspoffo
Copy link
Owner Author

I went in a different implemention direction in another branch, closing this.

@lucaspoffo lucaspoffo closed this Mar 12, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@lucaspoffo @FelixSelter @zicklag