Name: Anonymous 2009-12-10 12:25
Do you have a niche area you like to think you're pretty top-notch in? Might be a library, a user application, etc. You're one of the top few people in the world who could be pulled for proficient work in this area, no matter how silly it is.
For me, I like to think I am one of the few people with a strong grasp on the automation aspects of the IRC protocol. Sounds like a joke, but you've got to consider that despite numerous RFCs, IRC really has no protocol at all. A lot of IRC libraries don't get it right, and for good reasons... IRC is meant for human consumption, and is poorly suited to parsing and state tracking. A simple example of its many inconsistencies: you join a RFC1459-strict server and join a channel, where bob has +ov. You only see the +o when you join, but never see bob's +v. I think expressing this in the IRC library (that it is unknown whether bob has +v) is a great way to deal with mode ambiguity when writing IRC bots, but it seems I'm the only one.
So yeah, it's an area you're a pedant in, probably. A self-absorbed ass nugget.
For me, I like to think I am one of the few people with a strong grasp on the automation aspects of the IRC protocol. Sounds like a joke, but you've got to consider that despite numerous RFCs, IRC really has no protocol at all. A lot of IRC libraries don't get it right, and for good reasons... IRC is meant for human consumption, and is poorly suited to parsing and state tracking. A simple example of its many inconsistencies: you join a RFC1459-strict server and join a channel, where bob has +ov. You only see the +o when you join, but never see bob's +v. I think expressing this in the IRC library (that it is unknown whether bob has +v) is a great way to deal with mode ambiguity when writing IRC bots, but it seems I'm the only one.
So yeah, it's an area you're a pedant in, probably. A self-absorbed ass nugget.