Of course I agree that documentation within jabberd2 has been a problem,
and that real API docs would be a good thing. The problem I've had is a
severe lack of time
As I mentioned in another posting, you already *have* some documentation
written. For many functions and structures there
Of course I agree that documentation within jabberd2 has been a problem,
and that real API docs would be a good thing. The problem I've had is a
severe lack of time - its taken 18 months to get the server to beta, and
thats without writing docs - how much longer would it take if I had?
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Matthias Wimmer wrote:
[strange, this message took three days to reach me]
You are the jabberd2 author?- I'd like to contribute by helping with code
docs. Contact me by mail if you agree.
Doxygen is a documentation of the code. Wouldn't it be better if every
function is
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Robert Norris wrote:
Of course I agree that documentation within jabberd2 has been a problem,
and that real API docs would be a good thing. The problem I've had is a
severe lack of time
As I mentioned in another posting, you already *have* some documentation
written. For
Matthias Wimmer wrote:
Hi!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 2003-09-04 22:20:21:
Additionally, I don't think really performance is an issue (at least with
the transports) right now. When I started working on AIM-t, there were
several errors in it that kept it crashing even in small environments.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Michael Poole wrote:
One moderately large IRC server (~6,000 clients) on a medium sized IRC
network (~40,000 clients peak) has been up for 56 days and received
1.4 billion lines; each line would be a full stanza in native Jabber.
650 million
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What are the current features of MIU?
Currently MSNP8 is supported for send/recv messages, buddy list
management and status. AIM and ICQ is supported for send/recv
messages, budddy list including nick names retrieval buddy presence
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Robert Norris wrote:
A Java implementation for transports would be really cool. I think one of
the major reasons the transports do not really evolve beyond it works for
basic IM and no more is because of C.
No, I think it doesn't get much further than just barely working
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What are the current features of MIU?
Currently MSNP8 is supported for send/recv messages, buddy list
management and status. AIM and ICQ is supported for send/recv
messages, budddy list including nick names retrieval buddy presence
Hi!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 2003-09-04 12:26:09:
You are the jabberd2 author?- I'd like to contribute by helping with code
docs. Contact me by mail if you agree.
Doxygen is a documentation of the code. Wouldn't it be better if every
function is documented by the one that introduced it?
Hello, lukasm!
On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:04:06 +0200, you said:
Why that? As far as I remember my courses C and Java have the same
expressive power.
l Java is 6-10 times slower than C.
Usually transports spend most of time inside select (poll, kqueue, etc) call.
And usually transport only
Alexey Shchepin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello, lukasm!
On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:04:06 +0200, you said:
Why that? As far as I remember my courses C and Java have the same
expressive power.
l Java is 6-10 times slower than C.
Usually transports spend most of time inside select
Doxygen is a documentation of the code. Wouldn't it be better if every
function is documented by the one that introduced it? Okay, this is much
work for Rob, but he knows most about what are valid arguments for a
function and what a function does.
Of course I agree that documentation within
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a Java Libraray that supports MSN P8, ICQ and AIM for JDK1.3 and
higher at http://sourceforge.net/projects/miu
A Java implementation for transports would be really cool. I think one of
the major reasons the transports do not really evolve
Hi!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 2003-09-03 12:40:55:
A Java implementation for transports would be really cool. I think one of
the major reasons the transports do not really evolve beyond it works for
basic IM and no more is because of C.
Why that? As far as I remember my courses C and Java
Matthias Wimmer wrote:
Hi!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 2003-09-03 12:40:55:
A Java implementation for transports would be really cool. I think one of
the major reasons the transports do not really evolve beyond it works for
basic IM and no more is because of C.
Why that? As far as I
lukasm wrote:
Matthias Wimmer wrote:
Hi!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 2003-09-03 12:40:55:
A Java implementation for transports would be really cool. I think
one of
the major reasons the transports do not really evolve beyond it
works for
basic IM and no more is because of C.
Why
lukasm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 3-9-2003 15:04:06:
Matthias Wimmer wrote:
Hi!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 2003-09-03 12:40:55:
A Java implementation for transports would be really cool. I think
one of the major reasons the transports do not really evolve beyond
it works for basic IM and
Lukas,
Why that? As far as I remember my courses C and Java have the same
expressive power.
Java is 6-10 times slower than C.
Normally I don't respond to stuff like this, but can't resist in this
case. :) The whole Java is 6-10 times slower thing is total bull that
might have been somewhat
--d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A Java implementation for transports would be really cool. I think one of
the major reasons the transports do not really evolve beyond it works for
basic IM
20 matches
Mail list logo
