Labeled replies about ircv3-specifications HOT 9 CLOSED

Would this require every command which can have a cookie attached to it rewritten to accept a cookie?

from ircv3-specifications.

Of course not.
Just add a message tag

08.03.2014 20:23, Shawn Smith пишет:

Would this require every command which can have a cookie attached to
it rewritten to accept a cookie?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#53 (comment).

from ircv3-specifications.

So, if a message has a id tag attached, any replies to that message also have that tag attached, with exactly the same value. Server doesn't interpret it, just echoes it back. It's the client's job to pick an id that won't be ambiguous.

Possibly if a batch start is tagged, then the whole batch is a reply and the messages inside it can be left untagged.

from ircv3-specifications.

I didn't think much about how it should work with batches, but this way is possible, why not.

from ircv3-specifications.

I think messages inside the batch should also be tagged because clients that don't understand batch are supposed to be able to parse the individual messages normally.

from ircv3-specifications.

Clients that don't understand batch shouldn't be sent batches so that's not really relevant.

from ircv3-specifications.

@M2Ys4U Yeah, disregard what I said, I was derping when I wrote it.

My original thinking was if a client understood BATCH but didn't understand certain sub-types of BATCH then it would need everything inside tagged, but that's obviously wrong, so my bad.

from ircv3-specifications.

This is indeed a good idea! Just now I was thinking on how to catch replies to my bot's commands, but came to a conclusion that there is no reliable way of getting initial command which caused said reply to happen, attaching a cookie to commands would solve this problem.

from ircv3-specifications.

Discussion is moved to #162

from ircv3-specifications.