[Beta] Local Flash Connection

[img:left]http://mmf.nijumi.de/extensions/LocalFlashConnection.jpg[/img] Here my next extension.
The Local-Flash-Extension can get and/or received messages from other "local" multiple SWFs [color:#666666](you can communicate with other swfs on the same domain)[/color].

[color:#666666]See the Example for more informations :)[/color]

[color:#3366FF]Example:[/color]
Start the Example

[color:#006600]Download:[/color]
Download the Local-Flash-Extension

[color:#CC0000]Please Donate for more Extensions:[/color]
Please Donate !!

The extension is global across the frames.

Haha, that's pretty cool. I'm sure this'll be really nice for self-published games, thanks Pharanygitis. It's an idea I would never have thought up, and it's neat.

oooooooooooo VERY NICE!

Pharanygitis, this is neat. I couldn't believe my eyes.

Marv

Thanks,

Really useful!!!

Wow this is really cool! Thanx Pharanygitis

This is fantastic, thank you - will have a play with this later :)

Awesome extension!


But is there a way to actually send text to all opened channels at once? For instance, if someone (ok, me), would want to create a simple, in-game chat window, would it be possible to send text to every other connected user without sending each one the same text separately? (and for that, I would need each user "channel" ID, which is problematic since there's no way to know how many users are connected, nor their "channel" ID)...

I'm willing to support development of this extension (donate) if a new version that allows sending text to all opened channels gets done. (If it can already do this, please let me know how, I'll donate anyway!) :)

You can set the "channelname" on - Start local connection - in "connection name". See the example :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pharanygitis

You can set the "channelname" on - Start local connection - in "connection name". See the example :)

---

Yes. That I know. But there can't be more than one "instance" of the application running on a single channel. I tested it yesterday, and even in your example, one has to select channel 1, and the other, channel 2. If both select the same channel, the first one can send messages, but the other can't. The application can't even get the domain name for the second user if on the same channel.

My goal would be to create a simple, in-app, little chat window that any user can go into and send messages to anyone else connected a that time. But for that, either all users need to be on the same channel, or we would need a way to send text to all openned channels at the same time, in a single command, without having to specify the name of each channel.

Either way would work, as I could send a bunch of information in a string (like username, message, and anything else that might be "application-related") and use a string tokenizer to separate all the data, and then use that data to post a message in the application.

This object is great, really, but while I'm not an expert in Flash or C++ (and thus don't know what can or can't be done), this object would be really AWESOME if sending text to all opened channels at once was possible (or having more than one person on the same channel so everyone also receives messages).

Is this something possible or is there a technical limitation somewhere that would prevent such a thing? I'm just curious, because like I said, if that was possible, that object would allow the creation of not only cool chat clients, but would also allow the creation on simple flash games that could support online multiplayer without having any kind of server or additionnal need for complex connection management. That would be the BEST OBJECT EVER for Flash development in my mind. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Realnoize

that object would allow the creation of not only cool chat clients, but would also allow the creation on simple flash games that could support online multiplayer without having any kind of server or additionnal need for complex connection management. That would be the BEST OBJECT EVER for Flash development in my mind. :)

---

Lacewing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jamie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Realnoize

that object would allow the creation of not only cool chat clients, but would also allow the creation on simple flash games that could support online multiplayer without having any kind of server or additionnal need for complex connection management. That would be the BEST OBJECT EVER for Flash development in my mind. :)

---

Lacewing?

---

Well, looks interesting, but the Local Flash Connection Object doesn't need any server to function. And it's dead simple to set up. Seriously, if that object would be able to send information to all running instances (channels) of a flash application on the same domain (instead of having to send to a specific channel ID everytime), it would be AWESOME, as it would allow the creation of simple games and apps with multiplayer functionalities (provided lag isn't a big issue for the game) without requiring any server whatsoever. That's the important part, in my opinion, since you're not dependant on the availability of a server to make the application work.

I know there are ways to make flash applications online-enabled trough other tools, but the Local Flash Connection is surely the most easy and simple to use, and without the need to set up and use a server, that's an awesome object in my mind.

Now if only it would allow to send to all available "channels" at the same time.... = ultimate awesomness!!! Every user would be able to open a channel according to a username, which would allow sending information either privately between two channels, or massively to all opened channels... And if you send a string with various information separated by a delimiter like "|", and use a string tokenizer, to get all this info on the receiving end.... man... just think of the possibilities!!! Without having to use a server!!!! And with nothing to set up aside from putting the object in your app and "opening a channel".

You know that this doesn't work between PCs right? Only on one PC?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dynasoft

You know that this doesn't work between PCs right? Only on one PC?

---

Well, it is said it work on Flash applications that are on the same domain. I never saw that it was working only on one PC. Unless I missed something (which is entirely possible).

- EDIT : I just tested this from two different PCs, and well, it seems to only work on one PC. My bad. I was under the impression this would work on different PCs. That would've been awesome though, even if I don't know how it would have been possible. Again, sorry for having been confused about that! ;)

That would be impossible :)

Lacewing, however, works just fine across multiple computers, and there are 24/7 public servers so you don't have to run your own (unless you start using lots of bandwidth).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jamie

That would be impossible :)

Lacewing, however, works just fine across multiple computers, and there are 24/7 public servers so you don't have to run your own (unless you start using lots of bandwidth).

---

Well, yeah, but I can't consider it reliable enough to be used professionaly, as I'll be entirely dependant on the availability of a server (that I have no control over) to make my applications function properly. I know I can set up a server myself, but since it would be a lot of trouble to set up something, as my ISP can't provide me with a dedicated IP address, I also have to rule that out. (Unless there's a solution I'm not aware of).

If there was a paying service available that would guarantee me an available service for as long as I pay, I would pay and use that. Otherwise, I can't really take a chance using a server that might be moved or shut down eventually, for whatever the reason. Even if it's in 5 years from now.

Lacewing seems great, but since I can't control availability of servers in the long run, I don't want to spend energy developping applications that could use it to find down the road that it has become unsupported, or that I need to update all my applications with a new server address to comunicate with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Realnoize

Well, yeah, but I can't consider it reliable enough to be used professionaly, as I'll be entirely dependant on the availability of a server (that I have no control over) to make my applications function properly.

---

If you are doing something professionally/commercial, then why not run your own server? Running pyLacewing on a VPS is very cheap, if you've got some Linux experience.