> > 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...).

Well, this is because there is no Standard that defines case sensitivity
usage for the protocol. A clear majority of the hubs use Y(n)Hub which has
for a long time been case insensitive. Two users with the same nick (except
for their cases) are not allowed, and a user can change nick case and re-
login, if I got Yoshi's statement correctly.

> 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

Yeah, and as I said, case insensitivity matching isn't something that is to
be done too often anyway, so for it being to complex for the implementations
is a weak argument I think.

> 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...)

And I clearly disagree and believes "user experience" (oh, I hate that
expression) should be prioritized higher than a Slightly more complex string
routine for nick identification.

(Why do I see a lot of "=" and "=20"'s in this mail?)

Opera

-- 
DC Developers mailinglist
http://3jane.ashpool.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dcdev