?

Log in

No account? Create an account
CVS ChangeLog: - Nonblocking connect. Now only gethostbyname()… - LogJam [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
LogJam

[ website | LogJam ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Aug. 11th, 2000|11:41 am]
LogJam
logjam
[evan]
CVS ChangeLog:
- Nonblocking connect. Now only gethostbyname() blocks.
- Summary added to friends view.


To post using LoserJabber from vim:
- install LoserJabber in to the path
- set up your account in the identities (optional)
- type your post in vim
- run this vim command: %!lj -u username -
(you'll need to add your password if you skipped step 2.)
- the output will appear in your buffer.

I'm sure you could do something similar with emacs...
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: revjim
2000-08-11 12:08 pm (UTC)

a few things...

The command line options are great. Posting via STDIN works wonderfully.

What you may want to do, however, is when using the command line options, don't pop up the little "connecting..." window. This way, posting can be truly "NON GUI".. that way I can telnet into my box at home, and post using LoserJabber without the need for an X server.

I also think I found a little baby bug (though I don't have the specifics down yet, as I haven't figured out how to reliably reproduce it) in either the "History" feature, or in GtkSpell. I am not sure which yet. I'll get back to you.

Man... I really wish I knew C. I feel like such a glutton not being able to contribute anything but complaints and praise.

I can code pretty well... maybe you have something small I can help with and I can learn as I go? Something without too sharp of a learning curve?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bradfitz
2000-08-11 12:52 pm (UTC)

Re: a few things...

if you want a livejournal client that works from the command line without any need for X to be present at all, go download my Perl client from the download page....
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: revjim
2000-08-11 12:59 pm (UTC)

Re: a few things...

That is what I use now, when I need to update without any GUI support (i.e. no web browser, and no GUI LJ Client). However, I figured if Evan was adding command-line support, he should either make it 100% command-line... or just make the command line options help the GUI out (auto-login) prefilled, buffer waiting for a "SUBMIT" etc. But the way the command line options work now, are just like a command line only tool. They login, submit, logout, and exit. So... I figured if that were the case, he may as well make X unrequired when using command line options, don't you think?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bradfitz
2000-08-11 01:05 pm (UTC)

Re: a few things...

well, the way the code's organized, that may be difficult.

once he calls gtk_init or whatever, X is required ... his networking code creates windows and stuff. i guess he could that out, but the binary is linked with the gtk libraries I believe, which means he'd need a separate binary to be distributed if it were to be totally non-X.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: evan
2000-08-12 06:42 pm (UTC)

Re: a few things...

Man... I really wish I knew C. I feel like such a glutton not being able to contribute anything but complaints and praise.

I can code pretty well... maybe you have something small I can help with and I can learn as I go? Something without too sharp of a learning curve?

What can you "code", if not C? :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: revjim
2000-08-13 10:23 am (UTC)

Re: a few things...

Heh. When put that way... nothing, nothing at all. *smile*.

What I meant is that I have pretty good general programming skills. I write very clean, fast, straight forward code that is easy to read, and easy to debug. I have sound design, generally building in a modular fashion, leaving plenty of room for future improvments.

I have actually written a few C programs before, and can debug easy things. I have even recently modified a C applicaiton ("motion") to my liking.

The problem that arises with applications like LoserJabber, is that I have only ever coded one GUI application (and it was in Visual Basic, which doesn't really count). So... all of the Gtk- this and Gtk- that confuses the hell out of me because I don't know C well enough to be able to follow what is going on. I understand structs, and variable declarations, and functions, and pointers and references, but don't always understand what I am looking at when I see it, and don't always know when I should use what. I have never really had to deal with memory allocation and deallocation.

I currently program mostly in PHP and Perl, because the nature of most of my work makes it best suited for my needs. In the past I have also worked with Tcl/Tk, Clipper, Pascal, Visual Basic, Java, and JavaScript. I can usally learn something pretty quickly if I have a good reference book and some sample code.

The problem, again, with LoserJabber, is it is divided in 14 different files, with almost each of those having a header file. In addtion, it needs Gtk which complicates things even more.

So, to sum up. I know nothing, really nothing.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: evan
2000-08-13 09:50 pm (UTC)

Re: a few things...

(This is all kinda random, sorry.)

The best code to write is the code you need... if LoserJabber is lacking a feature, you could add it.

The "command-line-only" feature you mention, though, is probably impossible, for the reasons Brad gave.

Regarding the 14 different files, well, that's the way understandable software is written. Each file (with the exception of lj.c, the main part of the program) is an independant piece of the program.
They average at about 400 lines (history.c and friends.c bring the average up), which makes them digestable with a bit of thought.

Personally, I hate working with other people's code. It's probably my biggest limitation as a programmer.

GUI code is really painful to write, but as far as GUIs go, GTK is really quite easy. Regardless, it's probably better to learn it independently of LoserJabber. The Perl bindings for GTK are a lot of fun. They're much more logical than the C bindings.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)