Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
1) I'm not so keen on renaming ExampleAIClient.dll, as using that name means
that it's as simple as possible to convert the example BWAPI project to update
the client module - reducing the barrier to entry.
2) I'm not sure what the issue is here - as of the moment you can just import
the folder into eclipse (I'm using helios), and eclipse figures out the file
structure just fine.
3) Maybe a better idea than 2) is to have a seperate distributable that is set
up as an eclipse project, so new people can just open the project without
worrying about setting the native dll path (good for beginners not familiar
with importing native libraries in eclipse?). Also maybe for other IDEs?
Original comment by Fobbah
on 25 Jul 2011 at 9:27
I agree with Luke that this could be packaged better.
For me, compiling the CPP file (especially in 64 bit) so I could modify it, was
a particularly difficult process because none of the dependencies are included
in the SVN. Hence why I packaged up the download with dependencies included
(and a Visual Studio project) as "jni-bwapi-0.2.2+dependencies".
I notice also that the SSCAI organisers have used a repackaged version of
JNIWBAPI based on that download to make it easier for beginners.
1. I agree this is confusingly-named. As far as I can see, JNIBWAPI's
ExampleAIClient.cpp has almost nothing left in common with BWAPI's one, besides
being a BWAPI client. Furthermore it is not an example for beginners to tinker
with any more, it is a relatively-complete client which acts as a bridge to
Java. I've named it client-bridge.dll (with x86 or amd64 appended) in my own
copy of this project - I think client-bridge or JNIBWAPI is a lot more accurate
than ExampleAIClient.
2. I didn't find it a problem to use the project in eclipse, but I do dislike
the fact it's set out as "eisbot.proxy". EISbot has a separate SVN now, so it
would make sense to rename this to something more generic. I use the name
"javabot" for mine, but "jnibwapi" would be good as well.
3. Is there a problem with setting up an eclipse project in the SVN? It would
make it easer to release as a coherent package, and easer for beginners to pick
up with less to set up.
4. Is there a problem with adding the C++ dependencies to the SVN? Even the
Visual Studio project? For the same reasoning as 3, I think it would help.
I can carry out this change if we can agree it's a good idea.
Original comment by phoeni...@gmail.com
on 4 Jan 2013 at 7:43
If nobody has any objections, I'll package the current repo including the
changes I recently made as JNIBWAPI 0.3 and create a release.
Original comment by phogle...@gmail.com
on 18 Jul 2013 at 9:23
I'm more for jnibwapi.c instead of client-bridge.c, but what the heck, looks
good. Go for it!
Original comment by martijn....@gmail.com
on 18 Jul 2013 at 3:46
I like client-bridge as it might be confusing to have everything called
jnibwapi.
Release done!
Original comment by phogle...@gmail.com
on 19 Jul 2013 at 2:24
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
LukeDic...@gmail.com
on 17 Jul 2011 at 1:33