[Citadel Development] (no subject)

2010-04-30 Thread fleeb
IG, I think Uncensored is not seending e-mails again.

[Citadel Development] (no subject)

2010-04-30 Thread fleeb
Hrm... but I was able to send an e-mail to an account outside of Uncensored, so, maybe I'm wrong.

[Citadel Development] (no subject)

2010-04-30 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
The queue was backed up a couple of days ago. At the moment I'm sending all mail out through a pool of smart hosts, so it'll get delivered faster. We have to revisit mail delivery at some point.

[Citadel Development] Re: Citadel commit log: revision 8546

2010-04-30 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
probably just because i'm used to memcpy; I thing strndup will check for \0 while copying which we don't need to since we know the length? We're going to continue to have a difference of opinion on this. I still prefer readability and maintainability over shaving off a handful of cpu

[Citadel Development] Re: Citadel commit log: revision 8546

2010-04-30 Thread dothebart
  Fr Apr 30 2010 09:43:39 EDT von IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored Betreff: Re: Citadel commit log: revision 8546 probably just because i'm used to memcpy; I thing strndup will check for \0 while copying which we don't need to since we know the length? We're going to continue to have a

[Citadel Development] Re: Citadel commit log: revision 8546

2010-04-30 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
Let's not mess with it yet -- the module is not finished. The reason I'm maintaining this xmpp mortuary is because when a Jabber client logs in, the first thing we have to do is flush out all of the roster entries that existed in all previous sessions. Stupidly, XMPP doesn't have a way to tell

[Citadel Development] Re: Citadel commit log: revision 8546

2010-04-30 Thread dothebart
  2. Delete (from the hash table) any buddies who happen to be online *now* Heh, Perfect! we just implemented Deleting ;-) Maybe we need to do this with a Hashkey now too.

[Citadel Development] Re: Citadel commit log: revision 8546

2010-04-30 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
So there wasn't a Delete operation at the time I started writing this? Oops :) At the moment, the key and value are both the full address. If you want to change it to a hash later, that's fine, but please let me finish the application logic first.