What's new
By:
  • Visit Rebornbuddy
  • Visit Panda Profiles
  • Visit LLamamMagic
  • Visit Resources
  • Visit Downloads
  • Visit Portal
RebornBuddy Forums

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

.dll CC's Yes or No

Should .dll CC's be allowed

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.
i voted.
now, my 2 cents.

i like the idea of the cc devs being able to share their code or not to share it.
ie. giving them the choice to dll or not to dll.

having dll ccs is a great way for those that would like to learn coding to get
ideas and inspiration from.

i also can understand that those who have worked hard crafting an amazing cc
may not want others effing with it.

if it could be both ways, i think it would be good.
 
I dont agree with the "one dodgy dll and its all over for us", because it is much easier to grab say, BigSister that gets your acc info, and send it to a remote server. It even works standalone, so, nothing HB2 can do about it.

It comes down to what you trust and not trust...
 
MrBig said:
I dont agree with the "one dodgy dll and its all over for us", because it is much easier to grab say, BigSister that gets your acc info, and send it to a remote server. It even works standalone, so, nothing HB2 can do about it.

It comes down to what you trust and not trust...
Click to expand...

I dont trust you, your Big er than me ;)
 
Mordd said:
(...) now my code is much more complicated and I actually have a working core that can be applied to any meele class. The idea of someone changing a few variables, moving some code around and renaming the CC to suit their needs and release it just makes my skin crawl (...)
Click to expand...

Enough said :)
Yay for DLLs
 
Well 67% is a fair number in favour of this, it doesn't surprise me.

Not trying to flog a dead horse (as the saying goes) but if this product was to grow and evolve like any other product - by users feedback and input - then DLL support should be included. But thats just my logical point of view.
 
Last edited:
Imo there should be possibility for developers to cover their hard work.

However as HB user i would appreciate requirement for combat part of code to be fully customizable for everyone (thinking about rotations/priorities parts of code).
 
The One CC has customizeable spell rotations and spell prioritization, even in DLL form.
 
look, in the end, dlls make things easyer, to get ecliptor running, you need 3+ files now, more files = more things end users can mess up, and cause problems for you. not only that but i implemented a nice gui config because it gives users a nicer experience not having to edit values manualy, and it makes it look more professional, i guess in the end, i couldnt care less. and i fail to understand why the "average user" even cares. when in theory this is only a CC Dev, and HB/GB dev issue.
 
Abstraction...

DLL compilation permits a form to configure the custom class, which precludes the possibility (mostly) of people messing with the code itself. Rather, they are permitted to get and set variables as needed to configure. Moreover, if security is a concern, why not have the cc developers give an MD5 of the dll to the HB devs so that each release can be verified. Or the signing key would work as well.
 
okeofs said:
Abstraction...

DLL compilation permits a form to configure the custom class, which precludes the possibility (mostly) of people messing with the code itself. Rather, they are permitted to get and set variables as needed to configure. Moreover, if security is a concern, why not have the cc developers give an MD5 of the dll to the HB devs so that each release can be verified. Or the signing key would work as well.
Click to expand...

Works for me :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top