egghelp/eggheads community

forced -e

2005-04-13T05:46:01-04:00

They're redundant...the right "hand made" list would be {stop:mode 0}, but you should always use the list commands to create lists to avoid problems and redundant string->list conversions.

yeah in this case they are really, sorry, but in some cases they aren't. Maybe only when "eval" is involved, I don't exactly know it either, at least this one works always while

gave me a headache from time to time, that I can tell you for sure. I have been working a while abusing egghttp and fileevent to handle over someextra vars. Anything but this {} thing often (not always) caused problems, especially if there are more than 1 extra argument. Since I am a lazy guy I don't want to try and findle with
- first, when no userinput is stored in this list and I can easily just use {} ^-^.
  btw: why not just .chanset #theChan -userexempts?
  hmm, I believe the bot wouldn't reject exempts from +o users, would he? Probably he doesn't really believe in his chan ops ^-^.

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Wed Apr 13, 2005 5:46 am

forced -e

2005-04-12T21:17:16-04:00

However, these {} are not redudant of course, we need an explicit list and not just a whitespace containing string ^-^. I tried to use

and such things, but they somehow dont neccearyly do the same.

They're redundant...the right "hand made" list would be {stop:mode 0}, but you should always use the list commands to create lists to avoid problems and redundant string->list conversions.

btw: why not just .chanset #theChan -userexempts?

Statistics: Posted by user — Tue Apr 12, 2005 9:17 pm

forced -e

2005-04-12T06:50:02-04:00

I didnt know you could pass a variable in a bind either. Can you pass strings as well as integers?

anything is possible, you can even supply configurable variables as content like in my chanservneed script.
However, these {} are not redudant of course, we need an explicit list and not just a whitespace containing string ^-^. I tried to use

and such things, but they somehow dont neccearyly do the same.

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Tue Apr 12, 2005 6:50 am

forced -e

2005-04-12T04:03:21-04:00

I didnt know you could pass a variable in a bind either. Can you pass strings as well as integers?

Statistics: Posted by ^DooM^ — Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:03 am

forced -e

2005-04-11T12:30:21-04:00

That looks new for me, thanx for sharing.

Statistics: Posted by Sir_Fz — Mon Apr 11, 2005 12:30 pm

forced -e

2005-04-11T06:19:39-04:00

if you do something like

Code:

bind pub m !stop-e "{stop:mode} {0}"bind pub m !start-e "{stop:mode} {1}"proc stop:mode {force nick uhost hand chan arg} {  set ::forcee([string tolower $chan]) $force}

you can save a lot of code... i dont know about speed, but i don't know why it should be slow .
you could even skip the string tolower, the channel name capitalization will always be the same for the bot.

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:19 am

forced -e

2005-04-11T05:44:16-04:00

Code:

foreach echan [channels] { set forcee([string tolower $echan]) 1}bind mode - "* +e" force:modebind pub m * stop:modeproc force:mode {nick uhost hand chan mode target} {  global forcee if {(![isbotnick $nick]) && ([botisop $chan]) && ($forcee([string tolower $chan) == 1)} {   putquick "MODE $chan –e $target" -next   } }proc stop:mode {nick uhost hand chan arg} { global forcee if {[string equal -nocase "!stop-e" "[lindex [split $arg] 0]"]} {  set forcee([string tolower $chan]) 0  return 0 } if {[string equal -nocase "!start-e" "[lindex [split $arg] 0]"]} {  set forcee([string tolower $chan]) 1  return 0 }}

!stop-e !start-e to disable or enable.

Statistics: Posted by Sir_Fz — Mon Apr 11, 2005 5:44 am

forced -e

2005-04-11T05:02:34-04:00

Can there be a trigger built in? For example !stop-e So the Bot stops pushing -e !

Greetz

overfly

Statistics: Posted by overfly — Mon Apr 11, 2005 5:02 am

forced -e

2005-04-11T02:08:04-04:00

thanks a lot awyeah

Statistics: Posted by Vixs — Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:08 am

forced -e

2005-04-11T02:00:02-04:00

Something like this is more simpler indeed.

Code:

bind mode - "*+e*" force:modeproc force:mode {nick uhost hand chan mode target} { if {[botisop $chan] && ![isbotnick $nick]} {  putquick "MODE $chan –e $target" -next  }}

You can check in the bind for "*+e*" or check in the procedure for +e, if {[string match "*+e*" $mode]}, depending upon which ever you prefer.

Statistics: Posted by awyeah — Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:00 am

forced -e

2005-04-11T01:41:41-04:00

Actually i wanted to prevent people from setting +e on themlseves or others on chan, i managed to put around some coding

Code:

bind mode -|- "% +e" forcemod proc forcemod {nick uhost hand chan args} {set modechange [join $args]if {[scan $modechange "+e %s" $chan] != 1} { return }global botnickputquick “MODE $chan –e $nick” -next   }

I dunno how far this is right, but this does the execution like

Vixs sets mode: +e somenick!*@*
* RockBabe sets mode: -e Vixs!*@*
Instead of -e somenick , its doing the reverse.
How can the bot -e the target ie somenick in this case.
Please Help me correct the code.
thanks

Statistics: Posted by Vixs — Mon Apr 11, 2005 1:41 am