Speaking of bans, is MASS BAN still an issue? I dont know if it has already been resolved. /msg X kick #channel [EMAIL PROTECTED] is only for 200+, but how come level 75 users can use /msg x ban #channel [EMAIL PROTECTED] The number of users should be checked.. Like if you are a level 400, you could mass ban the channel. Any number lower should not exceed the 1/4 of the channel population.. Or maybe a certain number of users may be kicked/banned per hour..
On 7/11/07, Perry Lorier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Emanuel wrote: > Adding a flag to the ban command "/msg X ban [-w] <#chan> <REGEXP | > banmask>" and a new column in the ban table would make it possible > the use of regular expressions without restrictions, still.. wouldn't > solve the cpu time problem. There are a few other issues too. We try and use approximately 1kB of memory per channel (give or take). That includes the banlist, topic and what have you. Now to give users a consistant feel to channels we limit the number of bans you can have in a channel (to whatever it is), based on the assumption of 1kB/average_length_of_a_ban. Now at the moment a ban can't be longer than the string it's matching unless you start putting extraneous *'s into it. So if you were to add full regex's especially with | and [] into ircu the length of bans would be massively increased, and we'd either have to increase the amount of memory we allocate to a channel, or we'd have to start lowering the number of bans in a channel (and we all know how popular THAT would be). To be honest I don't think that many people would want the full advantage of regex's, they are generally pretty confusing. _______________________________________________ Coder-com mailing list Coder-com@undernet.org http://undernet.sbg.org/mailman/listinfo/coder-com
-- miguel _______________________________________________ Coder-com mailing list Coder-com@undernet.org http://undernet.sbg.org/mailman/listinfo/coder-com
