RE: SV: [dcdev] Anyone still alive?
"Jacek Sieka" <[email protected]>
2005-01-06 9:20
"'Direct Connect developers'" <[email protected]>

> Hey there, I think there needs to be a standard. Either case=20
> sensitivity or not, and I prefer not. When are case=20
> insensitivity matches taking place? Only on login to check=20
> user name? In that case, It's not like every command needs=20
> these checks, and I'm not sure why this would be heavy for a=20
> hub. I kind'a don't like the idea of forcing nick names into=20
> a specific case. We already have that when logging into unix=20
> machines and in many other computer domains for usernames...=20
> Personally I don't like it, but it's not the end of the world.
Now hubs have to ensure the nick's unique case-sensitive (this really =
means that clients shouldn't be confused/crash (dc++ comes to mind =3D) =
by nicks differing only in case). If the hub developer feels like it, =
(s)he can still enforce unique case-insensitive nicks (for improved =
quality-of-service to the users...).

As to speed issues with tolowercase, as long as we only use the first 16 =
bits of the unicode chars (which for example windows dows), it's just as =
fast as tolowercase'ing a 7-bit ascii string (nearly, disregarding the =
doubled memory and lookup table size), so it all boils down to whether =
the os supports a good unicode case conversion function, and I believe =
most do.=20

That said, I'll go for case sensitive anyway, insensitivity always =
brings more work, and the point is to keep the hub rather simple (in a =
perfect world, I'd remove the nick constraint, but I realise that people =
might not like looking at cid's to tell who's who...)