> > 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.

> 
> Isn't it still valid, if you want to enable people to write hubs with
> a spare afternoon?  Or to keep the code simple and portable, not
> dependent upon iconv or... whatever?

Yeah, validity indeed but weak as I said, since the result of the protocol
shouldn't have much to do with whether an application can be finished within
a day or a week. Simplicity and portability... Well yeah, that's probably
important *trying to figure out a sound reason for it*... I'd say the dependence on an xml-parser (and why not zlib/bzip2 etc) is reason
enough to focus on usability and not simplicity in a sense that makes no
sense, unless you're trying to build a hub for a hand held device, like a
palm pilot. Read my humble arrogance correctly, I just don't fancy this so
over-emphasized issue of super-simplicity. Win32 doesn't need iconv for
this issue, even though iconv - as an example - is widely portable.
To me, speed issues and Reasonable simplicity are the only really sound ones.
And if hubs need to check nick for every mc/pm, and that massively stresses
the hubs, and that is reason for case sensitivity, then fine... But then
again, last-case-caching shouldn't be too much to ask for, but I dunno, I
won't write any hubsoft, I'm just raising the question before protocol gets
'stable' ;)

Opera

PS / Thanks ender for the explanation / DS

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