19 Oct, 2009, Scandum wrote in the 2nd comment:
I believe it sends out some telnet negotiations. Try to print the characters as decimal values to make more sense of it.
19 Oct, 2009, Runter wrote in the 3rd comment:
I don't really understand what you mean. Do you want to filter out all non-alpha numeric?
19 Oct, 2009, Chris Bailey wrote in the 4th comment:
Hey, what exactly you want to do with that data is important in determining how to handle it. What is the goal?
19 Oct, 2009, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 5th comment:
Runter said:
I don't really understand what you mean. Do you want to filter out all non-alpha numeric?
Yes, I did at one point.
Chris Bailey said:
Hey, what exactly you want to do with that data is important in determining how to handle it. What is the goal?
I realized after reading up on the Telnet support that they are in fact telnet options as Scandom said.
I was able to develop a quick routine to handle it, but I still havent figured out how to handle byte-by-byte support for Win32 telnet systems. Does anyone have a good example of how one might go about this?
19 Oct, 2009, Tyche wrote in the 6th comment:
staryavsky said:
I was able to develop a quick routine to handle it, but I still havent figured out how to handle byte-by-byte support for Win32 telnet systems. Does anyone have a good example of how one might go about this?
Yes
19 Oct, 2009, Scandum wrote in the 7th comment:
staryavsky said:
I was able to develop a quick routine to handle it, but I still havent figured out how to handle byte-by-byte support for Win32 telnet systems. Does anyone have a good example of how one might go about this?
One thing to keep in mind is that Vista comes with telnet disabled, so it's a bit of a useless exercise trying to support it.
19 Oct, 2009, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 8th comment:
Scandum said:
One thing to keep in mind is that Vista comes with telnet disabled, so it's a bit of a useless exercise trying to support it.
staryavsky said:
I was able to develop a quick routine to handle it, but I still havent figured out how to handle byte-by-byte support for Win32 telnet systems. Does anyone have a good example of how one might go about this?
One thing to keep in mind is that Vista comes with telnet disabled, so it's a bit of a useless exercise trying to support it.
Come on man, what about all those Win95 users out there!!! :wink:
Just call me paranoid, but if you go down that road, what terminal dosn't support ANSI color ETC.
19 Oct, 2009, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 9th comment:
Tyche said:
Fantastic!
20 Oct, 2009, quixadhal wrote in the 10th comment:
staryavsky said:
Come on man, what about all those Win95 users out there!!! :wink:
Just call me paranoid, but if you go down that road, what terminal dosn't support ANSI color ETC.
Scandum said:
One thing to keep in mind is that Vista comes with telnet disabled, so it's a bit of a useless exercise trying to support it.
staryavsky said:
I was able to develop a quick routine to handle it, but I still havent figured out how to handle byte-by-byte support for Win32 telnet systems. Does anyone have a good example of how one might go about this?
One thing to keep in mind is that Vista comes with telnet disabled, so it's a bit of a useless exercise trying to support it.
Come on man, what about all those Win95 users out there!!! :wink:
Just call me paranoid, but if you go down that road, what terminal dosn't support ANSI color ETC.
This one doesn't! Mine is amber though, and currently doesn't work :(
21 Oct, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 11th comment:
It's no surprise that MUDs as a genre haven't evolved much if that's the target client architecture…
21 Oct, 2009, Scandum wrote in the 12th comment:
Especially if you consider that the VT220 has more advanced terminal handling than the average mud client.
21 Oct, 2009, Tyche wrote in the 13th comment:
David Haley said:
It's no surprise that MUDs as a genre haven't evolved much if that's the target client architecture…
Scandum said:
Especially if you consider that the VT220 has more advanced terminal handling than the average mud client.
The challenge of moving mud server developers out of the 1960's teletypes and into the 1970's virtual terminals is apparently insurmountable. ;-)
21 Oct, 2009, Runter wrote in the 14th comment:
Tyche said:
The challenge of moving mud server developers out of the 1960's teletypes and into the 1970's virtual terminals is apparently insurmountable. ;-)
David Haley said:
It's no surprise that MUDs as a genre haven't evolved much if that's the target client architecture…
Scandum said:
Especially if you consider that the VT220 has more advanced terminal handling than the average mud client.
The challenge of moving mud server developers out of the 1960's teletypes and into the 1970's virtual terminals is apparently insurmountable. ;-)
Yes, We can.
22 Oct, 2009, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 15th comment:
What's with the Duracell? What kind of crazy hack is that?
23 Oct, 2009, quixadhal wrote in the 16th comment:
Scandum is quite right. The number of incorrect vt100/vt220 emulations out there is amazing. I was going to make a comment comparing the size of a typical terminal program under windows to the amount of total RAM and ROM in the vt220, but it's annoyingly difficult to find that information. *shakes fist at commercialized internet*
In any case, when my terminal worked, it was fun to compare running things on it to running things on a software emulator. It was even more fun to send in bug reports and realize the author of the emulator didn't actually have a real terminal, and was going off specs from the internet. :)
I wondered that myself. Since the vt220 uses a serial port, my guess would be either a modem, or perhaps a little nic with a tcp stack and serial console.
In any case, when my terminal worked, it was fun to compare running things on it to running things on a software emulator. It was even more fun to send in bug reports and realize the author of the emulator didn't actually have a real terminal, and was going off specs from the internet. :)
Quote
What's with the Duracell? What kind of crazy hack is that?
I wondered that myself. Since the vt220 uses a serial port, my guess would be either a modem, or perhaps a little nic with a tcp stack and serial console.
Either way, i need to be able to run some type of pre evaluation of the input, I'm new to Ruby
so any help would be great! So far i've been playing with a regexp:
But I'm sure there's a better way. :wink: