User:Rabuf: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(Started detailing the chat project) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
{{mylangend}} |
{{mylangend}} |
||
Project ideas: |
Project ideas: |
||
Chat Server, Client, Gateway |
|||
This wouldn't replace the existing Chat Server project as it would be more complex, nor would it replace the IRC Gateway project (it'll be more complex in languages that have a good IRC library, but easier for languages that don't). |
|||
Chat Protocol: |
|||
The protocol will be a pared down variation of IRC (in fact, this might make the IRC gateway reuseable). Reading over tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1459 suggests that this paring down should be feasible. Primary thing that will be missing versus standard IRC is the 'relay' part. Single server, no server-to-server system in the base server. This will, hopefully, keep the project requirements down. There will also be no 'operator' group of users. Currently debating on the complexity and behaviour of channels. |
|||
Sidenote: The spam protection doesn't seem to work in IE so I can't actually add external links. Now I understand my issue earlier. |
|||
Revision as of 21:24, 6 November 2013
| My Favorite Languages | |
| Language | Proficiency |
| Common Lisp | Intermediate |
| Erlang | Intermediate |
| Haskell | Novice |
Project ideas:
Chat Server, Client, Gateway
This wouldn't replace the existing Chat Server project as it would be more complex, nor would it replace the IRC Gateway project (it'll be more complex in languages that have a good IRC library, but easier for languages that don't).
Chat Protocol:
The protocol will be a pared down variation of IRC (in fact, this might make the IRC gateway reuseable). Reading over tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1459 suggests that this paring down should be feasible. Primary thing that will be missing versus standard IRC is the 'relay' part. Single server, no server-to-server system in the base server. This will, hopefully, keep the project requirements down. There will also be no 'operator' group of users. Currently debating on the complexity and behaviour of channels.
Sidenote: The spam protection doesn't seem to work in IE so I can't actually add external links. Now I understand my issue earlier.