On 2003-11-16T14:34-0800, akl wrote: ) On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 13:04, Jeff Fisher wrote: ) > PRIVMSG #chan :\001ACTION is broken\001\001VERSION\001 ) most clients don't (or at least aren't supposed to) support that..
In my experience, most clients do support that. In any event, they are definitely "supposed to". CTCP messages are allowed to be embedded in normal messages, and are furthermore allowed to be stacked. http://www.irchelp.org/irchelp/rfc/ctcpspec.html ... - --- Example 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------- If the user actor wants to query the USERINFO of user victim, and is in the middle of a conversation, the client may decide to tack on USERINFO request on the end of a normal text message. Let's say actor wants to send the textmessage "Say hi to Ron\n\t/actor" and the CTCP request "USERINFO" to victim: PRIVMSG victim :Say hi to Ron\n\t/actor plus: USERINFO which after CTCP quoting become: PRIVMSG victim :Say hi to Ron\n\t/actor plus: USERINFO which gets merged into: PRIVMSG victim :Say hi to Ron\n\t/actor\001USERINFO\001 and after low level quoting: PRIVMSG victim :Say hi to Ron\020n\t/actor\001USERINFO\001 and sent off to the server. On victim's side, the message: :actor PRIVMSG victim :Say hi to Ron\020n\t/actor\001USERINFO\001 arrives. This gets low level dequoted into: :actor PRIVMSG victim :Say hi to Ron\n\t/actor\001USERINFO\001 and thereafter split up into: :actor PRIVMSG victim :Say hi to Ron\n\t/actor plus: USERINFO After CTCP dequoting both, the message: :actor PRIVMSG victim :Say hi to Ron\n\t/actor gets displayed, while the CTCP command: USERINFO gets replied to. -- Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://naim-users.org/nmlorg/ http://naim.n.ml.org/ It is so easy to miss pretty trivial solutions to problems deemed complicated. The goal of a scientist is to find an interesting problem, and live off it for a while. The goal of an engineer is to evade interesting problems :) -- Vadim Antonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on NANOG
