Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Sometimes when I join worlds I get the old chat messages after the new message. Should it be like this?
Offline
Sometimes when I join worlds I get the old chat messages after the new message. Should it be like this?
How should we fix that? Wait until all the old messages are in? How do we figure that? I mean personally I'd just make some sort of chat init that we would always receive, whether there are old chats or not... then once we receive that, we know that we're outputting non-stale chat.
or we could just like... order the chats...
edit: disclaimer: I know nothing about EE and am not a developer and you're not so I mean purely hypothetically
Offline
capasha wrote:Sometimes when I join worlds I get the old chat messages after the new message. Should it be like this?
How should we fix that? Wait until all the old messages are in? How do we figure that? I mean personally I'd just make some sort of chat init that we would always receive, whether there are old chats or not... then once we receive that, we know that we're outputting non-stale chat.
or we could just like... order the chats...
edit: disclaimer: I know nothing about EE and am not a developer and you're not so I mean purely hypothetically
afaik say_old is recieved after init2 is sent but say can be recieved before say_old showing what happens here, it is a split second so a small holding buffer would stop this from happening - either x number of messages or y number of milliseconds passed.
Thank you eleizibeth ^
I stack my signatures rather than delete them so I don't lose them
Offline
afaik say_old is recieved after init2 is sent but say can be recieved before say_old showing what happens here, it is a split second so a small holding buffer would stop this from happening - either x number of messages or y number of milliseconds passed.
Or perhaps not send the "say" to anyone who hasn't sent their init2 yet? I'm not sure I see where the delay could be handy
Offline
pm's are not in 'say'
also... instead of trying to make this different serverside fix it clientside
Offline
also... instead of trying to make this different serverside fix it clientside tongue
a) ok well I halfway suggested that with "or we could just order the messages"
b) can you explain what's better about client vs server side? Given that they have power over both, which would make more sense? Does either actually have a tangible benefit?
Offline
clientside does not break older bots, well ones that depend on recieving old_msg at a certain time, for most cases it is rather irrelevant though.
Offline
clientside does not break older bots, well ones that depend on recieving old_msg at a certain time, for most cases it is rather irrelevant though.
well my idea of packaging them all together would be the only thing insofar that would perceptibly have an effect on existing tools. Existing tools shouldn't be affected
Offline
For me it's only PMs or system messages, nothing else (usually PMs or message from bots)
pm's are not in 'say'
also... instead of trying to make this different serverside fix it clientside
Ohh, mistook that bot for another bot that feels it has to say when someone joins or leaves publicly.
Thank you eleizibeth ^
I stack my signatures rather than delete them so I don't lose them
Offline
Pages: 1
[ Started around 1740334279.1892 - Generated in 0.068 seconds, 13 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.54 MiB (Peak: 1.71 MiB) ]