[mindstormmaster] Posted May 28, 2003 Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 Is there a way to stream plain text (ie. the contents of Engine Assertion Out.txt) across a tcp socket? Or is there a way to launch an external bat/exe from within a C++ program? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guus Posted May 28, 2003 Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 I don't really get the question. If you have a socket-connection, you can transmit bits and bytes (that's the whole idea of a socket in the first place, afaik). Why wouldn't you be able to send text? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordT Posted May 28, 2003 Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 You could just use a WinSock class or anything similiar and use that. Must be out there somwhere Are you thinking of linking the program with a server where you could view all of it or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[mindstormmaster] Posted May 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 Ok, so maybe it was a stupid question... Basically the idea is to build something into Xenocide so that when it hits an error it automatically sends an error report back to a server so that the programmers can look at it. This is to help reduce the number of "It won't start!!!" reports and actually give us something useful. I know i can, and have, written the server end in java, but i wasn't sure about C++. Based on what you guys are saying it doesn't seem like a very big deal. When i have more details on how this is going to work i'll enlist you to write the client end of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red knight Posted May 29, 2003 Report Share Posted May 29, 2003 Yes you can, but wait until we finish the networklib, you will have anything you want... if anyone wants to take the task, we will need a stack trace for that to be useful... So if anyone can write a little routine that will walk the stack to get the actual methods called that would be more than useful... GreetingsRed Knight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[mindstormmaster] Posted May 29, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2003 Ok, sounds good. It's something to throw in when we start large scale testing for v1. I can just imagine the piles of messages saying "It won't work!" or "Fix it!!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guus Posted June 2, 2003 Report Share Posted June 2, 2003 (...) we will need a stack trace for that to be useful... So if anyone can write a little routine that will walk the stack to get the actual methods called that would be more than useful...I have tried, and failed The only way I can come up with writing such mechanism involves adding one or more functions to each method we use (to register and unregister the method to a stack). Not only is that prone to errors (we're bound to forget registering one or more methods), but it won't work on code that we haven't written ourselves either. RedKnight mentioned a microsoft .dll taking care of these problems, but after three days of googling and reading up, I'm seenig little stacks floating in front of my eyes... I need help here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamutas Posted June 3, 2003 Report Share Posted June 3, 2003 Well, this could be easily done if we were using MFC. It has tons of managing and debugging functions. The one you are interested in is AfxDumpStack. Or if we were using .NET. I was not be able to find more than that. I will look more and hopefully I will find something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red knight Posted June 3, 2003 Report Share Posted June 3, 2003 Will check at it too, i had found the dll imagehlp.dll but it wont cover Borland Builder OMF format.... So i will see if i can find something else for borland... I know there is a nice library that it is used as part of the GCC compiler for doing that kind of stuff and it can read everything.... Will check about it when i get some free time (if you didnt figure it out sooner)... I am busy working on the NetworkLib, probably we will have a working prototype soon... (I am waking up 7:40 AM mostly all week to work in that with a friend until 10 AM).... GreetingsRed Knight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordT Posted June 3, 2003 Report Share Posted June 3, 2003 Well if the error report is implemented I think it should be called on crash and have the user authorize it. Having it automated would just upset someones firewall or make their modems go online for no apparent reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[mindstormmaster] Posted June 3, 2003 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2003 That works for me, though it's a little ways off. And then we could prompt for other information from the user. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamutas Posted June 4, 2003 Report Share Posted June 4, 2003 Well if the error report is implemented I think it should be called on crash and have the user authorize it. Having it automated would just upset someones firewall or make their modems go online for no apparent reason.It better should be authorized, just because of some legal issues about collecting an information from client machines... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red knight Posted June 4, 2003 Report Share Posted June 4, 2003 My idea was to put an special app for doing so... besides we need to know what the user was doing while it fail... GreetingsRed Knight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts