Everyone should write an IRC client as an exercise in network programming due to its simplicity. The other IM protocol for which I've written a client is early MSNP, which is also text-based and not immensely more complicated than IRC. IMHO all the newer web-based stuff is a horrible mess of abstraction bloat. TCP, and TLS if you want encryption, should be a sufficient base to build upon.
Simplicity of IRC
211–220 of 250 posts
Re: Simplicity of IRC
#212It’s a real shame how difficult programming is. I don’t mean that it is difficult to write difficult things, but that it is difficult to write simple things. Once upon a time, one could download visual studio, click about to make a new project in (e.g.) Visual Basic, draw a gui in the gui editor, and click the run button. One could then start adding simple functionality (e.g. working through a book). Or even longer a…
TCL/TK >>>>>> VB. By a huge margin. VB would work great under Windows, but TCL/TK kits would work everywhere.
Indeed, just like VB6, tcl/tk is a great reminder of the late 90s.
Tcl was such an expressive yet minimalist language. Probably the only fast and easy way back then to create GUI applications on *nix systems. I guess Python + QT has killed it now, but with a massively larger footprint and resource usage obviously.
Re: Simplicity of IRC
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why you couldn't do the same in a Slack command-line program as well? Not hard to find simple examples of that. https://github.com/csabapalfi/slackcat
I think the op meant on the protocol level, not client. You can literally do `cat mycommands.txt > /dev/tcp/...`. IRC is pretty simple, I remember using telnet just for fun to connect (also the PING message replies are annoying to type yourself) and at one time, (ab)used an FXPable FTP server data port trickery in ASCII mode to send a message to a channel. Due to its simplicity I could see its application as a falbac…
Due to its simplicity I could see its application as a falback for global communication downtime/outages
I remember when the solution to this, when everyone was still working in an office, was "pair of netcats".
Re: Simplicity of IRC
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't prevent clients from logging communications in that server. I know the same is possible in slack or teams, but they don't consider that from a legal perspective.
From a legal, practical and technical perspective, any window displayed on any screen is equally succeptible to logging. I can't imagine the fact that the company disabled ctrl+c in the policy settings making any difference in a liability case.
> I can't imagine the fact that the company disabled ctrl+c in the policy settings making any difference in a liability case.
Taking reasonable measures absolutely does absolve the company. At that point, it becomes a rogue employee who’s deliberately circumvented policies and technical enforcements, who is now potentially personally liable.
It’s garbage, but hey ho.
Re: Simplicity of IRC
#215I use Matrix and bridge in IRC, and third-party platforms whenever necessary. So much less cognitive load having it all in one place.
Re: Simplicity of IRC
#216Have we learned nothing from the iPod and Dropbox? Simplicity doesn't matter. What matters are:
1) How easy is it to use?
2) What features does it offer me?
3) How well does it integrate into my lifestyle?
4) Do my family and friends use it? Can I get them to?
Slack and Discord win on ALL FOUR of the above points vs. IRC. IRC is a dead horse... stop beating it, please.
"The only thing that matters in software is the experience of the user." --Ryan Dahl
Re: Simplicity of IRC
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
> on windows This is the mistake. Linux and, I believe, OSX come with several tools pre-installed including python.
Which creates more problems than solutions. If the Python version that comes with your OS is not the one you want (e.g. it's outdated), then you'll have to: 1. Install the version you want anyway, and all the tools required (that usually don't come preinstalled in the OS) 2. Try to not make them collide, which, last time I tried, was a PITA, because the OS depends on original version of Python being in the the $PATH…
>and then people simply installed the actual, full version of Python they wanted.
Which then wouldn't work for all the repository python programs. The repo's python is what everything is built and tested against, so there is no replacing that.
Re: Simplicity of IRC
#218Re: Simplicity of IRC
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
I couldn't disagree more, I think bash is a horrifically bad programming language. Honestly I'm incredibly surprised anyone could compare PowerShell and bash and think that PowerShell is the arcane one.
PowerShell is the worst of bash and perl combined. It's like Microsoft took a look at each of those, "We can do that!" and implemented them.... worse.
What's bad about it specifically? Main thing I don't like is verb-noun, breaks tab complete
Re: Simplicity of IRC
#220It’s a real shame how difficult programming is. I don’t mean that it is difficult to write difficult things, but that it is difficult to write simple things. Once upon a time, one could download visual studio, click about to make a new project in (e.g.) Visual Basic, draw a gui in the gui editor, and click the run button. One could then start adding simple functionality (e.g. working through a book). Or even longer a…
Bash is the Basic of our era, the fact that it's so easy to do simple things explains why people are so often ready to use it despite its perceived and real shortcomings. Hopefully one of the new shells gains enough popularity to "flip" usage and give us a renaissance of powerful scripting interfaces.
Bash is terrible, adding an extra space breaks it
BASIC is smarter than C, it knows when = means assign and when it means equality