autodrop slow sources

Use this forum to flesh out your feature request before you enter it in <a href="http://dcpp.net/bugzilla/">Bugzilla</a>.

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
_abyss_
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-03-04 07:29

autodrop slow sources

Post by _abyss_ » 2006-04-10 14:43

Ok, there's an option to automatically drop slow sources, but how about making it little more usefull. What I mean is that it would be very handy to have that option for every individual file (just like priority settings). For example if I'm downloading some common file with 100+ sources, obviously I want to kick all slow sources. But when I'm downloading some rare file(s) (maybe 1 or 2 sources), I dont want to drop those sources even if they are slow.

I guess it would even be quite easy to make that kind of option. Just like autoprio settings for one or more files. Users could enter the default setting in main setup etc..

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2006-04-10 15:24

Oh sure, every feature is quite easy. Building an atomic bomb is as easy as rubbing two sticks together.

We'll be waiting for your patch..

_abyss_
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-03-04 07:29

Post by _abyss_ » 2006-04-10 15:44

Todi wrote:Oh sure, every feature is quite easy. Building an atomic bomb is as easy as rubbing two sticks together.

We'll be waiting for your patch..



I haven't done any programming for years, so I doubt I'll start now. But anyway, that kind of option really sounds easy to make. If there's something specific about it that makes it hard, just tell us. Otherwise keep your useless comments to yourself, ty.

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2006-04-10 16:01

_abyss_ wrote:I haven't done any programming for years, so I doubt I'll start now. But anyway, that kind of option really sounds easy to make. If there's something specific about it that makes it hard, just tell us. Otherwise keep your useless comments to yourself, ty.

Splitting an atom sounds very easy to do as well. If you havn't programmed in years, i assume you havn't gone through DC++'s code either, at which point.. how do you have the slightest idea of what's easy or not? Like i said, if it's so easy, do it yourself.

_abyss_
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-03-04 07:29

Post by _abyss_ » 2006-04-10 16:47

Splitting an atom sounds very easy to do as well. If you havn't programmed in years, i assume you havn't gone through DC++'s code either, at which point.. how do you have the slightest idea of what's easy or not? Like i said, if it's so easy, do it yourself.


lolz, dunno about you, but I think splitting an atom doesnt sound that easy (or maybe if I had a really sharp knife, hmm..).

Anyway I didn't say it is easy to make that feature, I said it sounds easy. And it's that way until someone explains why would it be not so easy. You think I should go through and familiarize myself with the dc++ code just for this little feature I thought of?
There's something preventing adding new flag for every file and check that before using already coded functionality to drop sources? Of course there might be some things I've missed since I dont know dc++ code etc, but to me it sounds easy.. cant help it.

ullner
Forum Moderator
Posts: 333
Joined: 2004-09-10 11:00
Contact:

Post by ullner » 2006-04-10 17:10

Why can't you just use 'Min sources online'?

Everything can sound easy, that doesn't mean it is. If you haven't gone through the code for DC++, you are in no position saying the feature would be trivial to code.

_abyss_
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-03-04 07:29

Post by _abyss_ » 2006-04-10 22:27

Why can't you just use 'Min sources online'?


lol, that seems to do it (i must been very lazy not to check what every setting means). It's not exactly what I meant, but let's hope it works.


Everything can sound easy, that doesn't mean it is. If you haven't gone through the code for DC++, you are in no position saying the feature would be trivial to code.


You people little slow or something? Where did I say it would be trivial to code? I said it sounds that way.. see any difference? Hell, it could even be impossible to code, but that's not the point here.

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2006-04-11 01:09

_abyss_ wrote:You people little slow or something? Where did I say it would be trivial to code? I said it sounds that way.. see any difference? Hell, it could even be impossible to code, but that's not the point here.

The point is, by saying "oh this feature sounds easy to do", you trivialize the hard work the developers of DC++ do, and all the time they put in to implement most of the very non-trivial feature requests that come up around here. If you had said "I have no idea how hard this would be to do, but i would appreciate it if someone who knew could take a look at it" or similar, you would have recieved a better welcome.

Pothead
Posts: 223
Joined: 2005-01-15 06:55

Post by Pothead » 2006-04-11 04:29

_abyss_ wrote:lolz, dunno about you, but I think splitting an atom doesnt sound that easy (or maybe if I had a really sharp knife, hmm..).
Just bombard an unstable lump of radioactive metal, with a bunch of Neutrons. :)

_abyss_
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-03-04 07:29

Post by _abyss_ » 2006-04-11 07:34

If you had said "I have no idea how hard this would be to do, but i would appreciate it if someone who knew could take a look at it" or similar, you would have recieved a better welcome.


That's exactly what I meant in the 1st post. I didn't say something like: "this is easy to do, so hurry up and do it!". I never claimed that I would know if the feature is easy or hard to implement. I was just saying out loud that in my opinion it sounds relatively easy. Maybe someone misunderstood something etc.. constructive comments are welcome, but this kind useless fuss helps no-one.

[NL]Pur
Programmer
Posts: 66
Joined: 2004-07-21 14:32

Post by [NL]Pur » 2006-04-11 14:40

Hurry _abyss_ Hurry!

just do it ;)

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2006-04-11 16:54

This thread isn't going anywhere, so I'm locking it.

Locked