Documentation?

[Bradley]

They are copyrighted (Razor, RunUO, the SDK, KUOC, etc). Without the authorisation of the copyright holder, you do not have the right to decompile the code. Period.

None of the abovementioned tools are handled by the GPL. None of them are opensource.

Besides, you are WRONG anyway:

10. In addition to local, federal, and international laws
prohibiting reverse engineering, the Licensee herby agrees to at no
time make any attempts to decompile RunUO or associated libraries
or alter them in any way other without express written consent
from the author.

That is on the download page when you click the SDK link. The SDK is an "associated library"

http://www.runuo.com/downloads/get_file.php?file=9

So please, don't try to find a way around it. Just don't decompile the stuff on this site.

Yup, I missed that claus in the license, I was wrong about that part.

But let me make another point about decompiling an application...

Some people out there are really smart, they can write applications directly in machine language, no need for a compiler... They can look at object code (already compiled code) and understand exactly what it does. The point of decompiling code is to see source, and exactly what is going on... So if a really smart person opens RunUO or the SDK in a hex editor, or even notepad for that matter, is that wrong and against the license? In effect they have "decompiled" the code in thier head, are they in violation of the lecense?

Visula studio comes with a tool called the object browser. The object browser opens a .Net EXE and examines the meta-data inside it using reflection to show properties, methods, and constants contained in it. You can even use th eobject browser to directly examine the IL code. IS it against the license to use the object browser?

The visual studio uses auto sence as you type to fill out function names and such... it uses the same reflection methods to get this information. IS it against the licese to use visual studio?

What if i write a program that uses the same reflection to dump the IL Code (compiled code) from the EXE out to a text file for a my own reference? did i break the license? Now what if i can read IL code? I've effectly decompiled the code in my head.

Now I don't want to make this a huge argument, but there is still nothing illegal about running an application on your computer that takes an input file (a compiled EXE), does some math on it (decompiles), and spits out the results to a new file. As long as you don't distibute what you produced to anyone but yourself.

 

[Phantom]

Object Browser doesn't show you the source

It shows you the method, but not the code within the metho's declaration.

If you decompile it beyond that then your A) You suck B) Your breaking your agreement C) You won't understand it so why bother.

There is no reason to decompile the SDK anyhow, if you think you need to then you don't know enough about programming to even use the SDK.

 

[AgentSmith]

Phanton said : "If you decompile it beyond that then your A) You suck B) Your breaking your agreement C) You won't understand it so why bother."

Yep, that rates as one of the most intelligent things you have said.

Your next statement which I wont bother cutting and pasting just goes to show you really are a big fish in a small pond.

A good programmer always comments there code, I realise its a concept your are properly finding hard to grasp considering your responses to people that have asked about documentation on the SDK. Also you must be one of those coders that cant code out side of a good IDE. You would be left wanting if given note pad and told to compile the solution.

 

[Phantom]

You don't know me.

All I know is nobody I know that actually knows how to program, needed to have documentation for the SDK.

I stand my statment if you need the source to the SDK to use it. Then you really don't know and should not be using it.

 

[Bradley]

Object Browser doesn't show you the source

It shows you the method, but not the code within the metho's declaration.

If you decompile it beyond that then your A) You suck B) Your breaking your agreement C) You won't understand it so why bother.

There is no reason to decompile the SDK anyhow, if you think you need to then you don't know enough about programming to even use the SDK.

Theobject browser uses Reflection to show the methods and properties... My point was that applications decompile a .NET exe using reflection, which is the same method that the object browser uses to display information about an object...

get a visual studio.net command prompt from the tools menu under visual studio, and run the command "ildasm". then oepn RunUO using this application you just ran. ildasm will show the full IL object code of any object, it is a part of Visual Studio .net (not a very well known one though).

 

[squishy]

does this thread go anywhere?

well i had a look on the class view of the dll and what im missing is:

nearer description of how methods work:
most methods and classes are self descripting but so or so it would be nice if i wouldnt have to guess most things by myself... Please dont argue with "bla if you were a real programmer..." I am fun-programmer which doesnt make me lazy but realistic... Clean programming requires a good base and if this dll would be really helpfull, it would at least provide xml comments
btw: im getting 'System.IO.DirectoryNotFoundException's all the time... where do i set the directory to search for? i cant do anything without specifying the file path

but all in all: nice work anyways

 

[Phantom]

1)Clean programming requires a good base and if this dll would be really helpfull, it would at least provide xml comments

Thats not true, besides no way we would be able to view the xml comments since the SDK is closed source.


2) btw: im getting 'System.IO.DirectoryNotFoundException's all the time... where do i set the directory to search for? i cant do anything without specifying the file path

Whats the code your using to get this error?


3) You done need anything more then intelisense, which is basicly the object browswer viewer.

Yeah I like intelisense makes the effort having to use sources like msdn no sort of out dated.

 

[squishy]

there actually are xml comments describing members so you know what the member does when the autocompletition pops up

well all basic methods im using result into this exception, eg:
Gumps gumps = new Gumps(); or
Map.[...].GetImage and so on

it doesnt seem to find the uo dir... i wonder why theres no option to specify the location of the files (even sphere provides that)

when i initialize Gumps, its directly followed by a 'System.TypeInitializationException': The TypeInitializer for Ultima.Gumps caused exception .....

 

[Phantom]

there actually are xml comments describing members so you know what the member does when the autocompletition pops up

well all basic methods im using result into this exception, eg:
Gumps gumps = new Gumps(); or
Map.[...].GetImage and so on

it doesnt seem to find the uo dir... i wonder why theres no option to specify the location of the files (even sphere provides that)

when i initialize Gumps, its directly followed by a 'System.TypeInitializationException': The TypeInitializer for Ultima.Gumps caused exception .....

I need actually "legal" code no some "..." code.

If your getting an expection there is a good reason. I have no problems using those methods, and no I will not give you an example of how to do it.

 

[squishy]

public Game() {
Gumps gumps = new Gumps();
}

this is the code... it throws the mentioned exceptions...

where does it actually try to open the files?

and why dont you want to give an example?

anyways i moved this discussion to:
http://www.runuo.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=187311#187311

since it is not actually about the documentation anymore