Search Results

Search found 7 results on 1 pages for 'wallacoloo'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• networking without port forwarding

  - by Wallacoloo

  I'm trying to add networking functionality to my game. I want any user to be able to host the game, and anyone to be able to connect as a client. The client sends info to the host about their player's position, etc. When the host receives a message, it validates it and then broadcasts it to its other clients. I will primarily be dealing with UDP, but will also need TCP for chat & lobby stuff. The problem is that I can't seem to get a packet sent from the client to the host or the other way around without enabling port forwarding on my router. But I don't think this is necessary. I believe the reason I need port forwarding is because I want to send a packet from 1 computer on a LAN to another computer on a different LAN, but neither of them have a global ip address since they're in a LAN. So really, I can only send packets targeting the other network's router, which must forward it on to the machine I want to reach. So how can I do this without port forwarding? Somehow a web server can communicate with my computer, which doesn't have a global ip, without port forwarding. And I've played plenty of multi-player games that don't require me to enable port forwarding. So it must be possible. Btw, I'm using SDL_Net. I don't think this will change anything though.

  Read the article

• class __init__ (not instance __init__)

  - by wallacoloo

  Here's a very simple example of what I'm trying to get around: class Test(object): some_dict = {Test: True} The problem is that I cannot refer to Test while it's still being defined Normally, I'd just do this: class Test(object): def __init__(self): self.__class__.some_dict = {Test: True} But I never create an instance of this class. It's really just a container to hold a group of related functions and data (I have several of these classes, and I pass around references to them, so it is necessary for Test to be it's own class) So my question is, how could I refer to Test while it's being defined, or is there something similar to __init__ that get's called as soon as the class is defined? If possible, I want self.some_dict = {Test: True} to remain inside the class definition. This is the only way I know how to do this so far: class Test(object): @classmethod def class_init(cls): cls.some_dict = {Test: True} Test.class_init()

  Read the article

• detecting circular imports

  - by wallacoloo

  I'm working with a project that contains about 30 unique modules. It wasn't designed too well, so it's common that I create circular imports when adding some new functionality to the project. Of course, when I add the circular import, I'm unaware of it. Sometimes it's pretty obvious I've made a circular import when I get an error like AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'attribute' where I clearly defined 'attribute'. But other times, the code doesn't throw exceptions because of the way it's used. So, to my question: Is it possible to programmatically detect when and where a circular import is occuring?

  Read the article

• importing same module more than once

  - by wallacoloo

  So after a few hours, I discovered the cause of a bug in my application. My app's source is structure like: main/ __init__.py folderA/ __init__.py fileA.py fileB.py Really, there are about 50 more files. But that's not the point. In main/__init__.py, I have this code: from folderA.fileA import * in folderA/__init__.py I have this code: sys.path.append(pathToFolderA) in folderA/fileB.py I have this code: from fileA import * The problem is that fileA gets imported twice. However, I only want to import it once. The obvious way to fix this (to me atleast) is to change certain paths from path to folderA.path But I feel like Python should not even have this error in the first place. What other workarounds are there that don't require each file to know it's absolute location?

  Read the article

• small code redundancy within while-loops (doesn't feel clean)

  - by wallacoloo

  So, in Python (though I think it can be applied to many languages), I find myself with something like this quite often: the_input = raw_input("what to print?\n") while the_input != "quit": print the_input the_input = raw_input("what to print?\n") Maybe I'm being too picky, but I don't like how the line the_input = raw_input("what to print?\n") has to get repeated. It decreases maintainability and organization. But I don't see any workarounds for avoiding the duplicate code without further decreasing the problem. In some languages, I could write something like this: while ((the_input=raw_input("what to print?\n")) != "quit") { print the_input } This is definitely not Pythonic, and Python doesn't even allow for assignment within loop conditions AFAIK. This valid code fixes the redundancy, while 1: the_input = raw_input("what to print?\n") if the_input == "quit": break print the_input But doesn't feel quite right either. The while 1 implies that this loop will run forever; I'm using a loop, but giving it a fake condition and putting the real one inside it. Am I being too picky? Is there a better way to do this? Perhaps there's some language construct designed for this that I don't know of?

  Read the article

• Python scope problems only when _assigning_ to a variable

  - by wallacoloo

  So I'm having a very strange error right now. I found where it happens, and here's the simplest code that can reproduce it. def parse_ops(str_in): c_type = "operator" def c_dat_check_type(t): print c_type #c_type = t c_dat_check_type("number") >>> parse_ops("12+a*2.5") If you run it as-is, it prints "operator". But if you uncomment that line, it gives an error: Traceback (most recent call last): File "<pyshell#212>", line 1, in <module> parse_ops("12+a*2.5") File "<pyshell#211>", line 7, in parse_ops c_dat_check_type("number") File "<pyshell#211>", line 4, in c_dat_check_type print c_type UnboundLocalError: local variable 'c_type' referenced before assignment Notice the error occurs on the line that worked just fine before. Any ideas what causes this and how I can fix this? I'm using Python 2.6.1.

  Read the article

• Explicitly typing variables causes compiler to think an instance of a builtin type doesn't have a pr

  - by wallacoloo

  I narrowed the causes of an AS3 compiler error 1119 down to code that looks similar to this: var test_inst:Number = 2.953; trace(test_inst); trace(test_inst.constructor); I get the error "1119: Access of possibly undefined property constructor through a reference with static type Number." Now if I omit the variable's type, I don't get that error: var test_inst = 2.953; trace(test_inst); trace(test_inst.constructor); it produces the expected output: 2.953 [class Number] So what's the deal? I like explicitly typing variables, so is there any way to solve this error other than not providing the variable's type?

  Read the article

1