From: poy <po...@12...> - 2009-08-01 17:06:02
|
> How often would this feature be used? I.e., would (should) clients add > that > every X message to ensure that they are not lagging (or every X seconds > etc)? clients supporting the version of ADC that has this MSG field should be able to understand such a MSG and display the timestamp they were given instead of making up their own. the field is optional, so they don't have to add it to every outgoing message; they can choose to if they want to get fancy. also, using this to measure the lag isn't what this was intended for, but if a client wants to use it for that purpose, no problem... > > While I can admit that it might be interesting to have real timestamps (if > not simply for the fact that it'd be similar to other protocols), I fail > to > see the usefullness for normal clients. (How would the client know when it > should send with timestamp and when it shouldn't?) At most, though, it > seems > this feature would only be really useful in a debugging environment. indeed, normal clients won't add this field to any of their messages; they should simply be able to treat incoming messages that have a TS param accordingly. as for the use case, i have a bot that logs messages for me when i am not online, and when that bot forwards messages it has been logging back to me, i receive all messages as though they just got written, although some might be dating from a week ago. therefore, i want my bot to add a TS field to each message specifying when it was sent, so that when DC++ receives it, it displays it with its original timestamp. another similar example would be a hub that offers an "offline PM" functionality: send a message to a regged user, and if that user is not online, the hub logs it and wait for that user to come back to send her your message. in this case too, the lag is not negligible anymore and there needs to be a way for the sender of the logged message (be it a hub or a bot) to tell when the message was originally sent. poy |