Skip to content

Loading…

channel get/info is not enough #67

Closed
thommey opened this Issue · 5 comments

1 participant

@thommey
Eggheads member
Trac Data
Ticket 67
Reported by @thommey
Status closed
Component Module: channels.mod
Priority minor
Milestone 1.8.0
Version 1.8.0 CVS

there's no way of knowing what channel settings are available (think udefs)

@thommey
Eggheads member

Comment by pseudo
I suggest a getudef command with an optional argument to specify the type to list. Without arguments, it should list all available udef settings.

@thommey
Eggheads member

Comment by pseudo
Done. I've made the following changes:

channel get #chan gives all settings and their values
[getudefs ?type?] returns all udefs, filtered by type, if given.
[chansettype setting] returns the type of a built-in or user defined setting (int/str/flag/pair)

@thommey
Eggheads member

Comment by @Robby-
Replying to [comment:2 pseudo]:

channel get #chan gives all settings and their values
For udefs the value is not given in the output, what does appear is what type they are. I don't know if this is intended to be this way (I actually think not, reading what you said that it should return the current values this seems more like a bug), but it would seem more uniform/correct with respect to the other built-in settings that it should return the value instead of the type.

@thommey
Eggheads member

Comment by pseudo
Replying to [comment:3 Robby]:

Replying to [comment:2 pseudo]:

channel get #chan gives all settings and their values
For udefs the value is not given in the output, what does appear is what type they are. I don't know if this is intended to be this way (I actually think not, reading what you said that it should return the current values this seems more like a bug), but it would seem more uniform/correct with respect to the other built-in settings that it should return the value instead of the type.

@thommey
Eggheads member

Comment by pseudo
Yeah, you're right. I fixed this.

Thanks for testing 1.8 thoroughly, that's the kind of feedback we've been hoping for. :)

@thommey thommey closed this
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.