Re: [dwm] minimal communication

The challenge is nice. However the major reason I love applications
that follow the suckless philosophy is the tendency to avoid large or
non-ubiquitous libraries. The setup at work is one involving a wide
variety of platforms and configurations, so having a complete setup
that works nigh-everywhere is very very appealing.

I like knowing what's going on but like a very efficient screen usage,
and allowing certain things piped to other things allows a variety of
customizable interfaces and setups. I prize that over shiny GUIs and
amazing configuration any day. I'd rather be able to grep a set of
text files, than adjust history writing settings, memory on scroll
back, or learn client specific commands on regexing the wanted
message.

I've ended up opening up the socket and readline libraries in ruby and
cobbling together a minimal IRC overlay. The most I'll be doing is
color coding output, trimming useless data, and setting up a few
macros for authentication. sic is almost perfect but for a few of it's
choices in output, and I got fed up with figuring out a decent way of
chaining pipes. When I can short circut a setup of 3 or 4 process with
just building a script that opens a few sockets, I'll call that a
gain.
Additionally I can apply the knowledge and already developed code to
when I take a whack a minimal cli jabber client.

2009/3/6 Neale Pickett <neale_AT_woozle.org>:
> Ian Daniher <it.daniher_AT_gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Why do you want to use sic over irssi?
>
> Maybe the guy likes a challenge :)
>
>> irssi is pretty light...
>
> The irssi processes on my multi-user server are currently the second
> biggest memory users.  Behind them are the web server, the SMTP, IMAP,
> and POP3 servers, bitlbee, and even the IRC server!
>
> It certainly isn't anywhere near as heavyweight as, say, pidgin, but I'd
> stop short of calling irssi "pretty light".  I'm pretty sure it weighs
> in heavier than any other text-mode client.
>
> Neale
>
>
>

-- 
stadik.net