From: Greg Millam <ruby-talk@...>
Date: 2005-09-01T06:17:24+09:00
Subject: Re: Still looking for a Ruby MUD client

> > The main reason that I, at least, am using net/telnet
> > is to let it's preprocessing function handle telnet
> > control codes.
> > 
> > Most of the rest isn't usable, due to the various ways
> > that (in my understanding) MUD output breaks the
> > telnet spec.

Very little is used in most muds. Some will use TelnetGA (those with
proper prompts, for example). Most will use terminal height/width, but
not much else.

> Does this mean that a "mud-telnet library" ought to be made, to help
> various other clients with these intricacies?

A MUDServer / MUDSocket, perhaps? That strictly provides network interfaces.

If we do employ such a thing, we might want to make it support multiple
connection types (i.e: MUDSocket::MXP?)

* MXP: Developed by zmud, supported by a few clients, fairly useful.
* Pueblo: The protocol that's so bad, it makes MXP look good.
* Straight-up ANSI/Telnet: using ANSI escapes for colors, etc.

> I already see various distinctions:
> * The GUI
> * The console app
> * The mud-scripting engine
> * the underlying mud-telnet library

This is a mix of tying together a mud engine and client. How closely
tied together they are varies from game to game.

> The scripting engine and telnet library ought to be external to one's
> mud client project.. just adopted as modules.

Should they even be included in the client? I know it's becoming popular
for more work to be done client side, but this still makes me feel iffy
:D.

> Even the GUI should be an abstraction above a more generic console
> app.

Whatever the client library, the protocol (mxp/pueblo/ansi/etc) should
be a separate library for general use, yes.

The single biggest problem I have in dealing with any mud server I've
written (and that's several: but all just 'toy' quality) is string
markup.

That is, say you have: "You see a <red>goblin</red> here, attacking
<yellow>you!</yellow>"

Practically any operation on the string (gsub, reverse, etc) would
thoroughly ruin the markup, regardless of protocol. (Ever seen an ansi
escape sequence in reverse?)

So what do I think we could do, as a community that would greatly ease
development of a mu* by anyone?

* Telnet MUDServer socket library that deals with height/width/etc. MXP
  and Pueblo are neat, but I never use 'em :D

* Telnet MUDClient socket for the same purposes.

* A library for strings w/ markup, and manipulating them.

My two gold pieces.

- Greg

aka Walker @ M*U*S*H