Forums Feature Suggestions Bot Version

I know eggdrops are favored for runing IRC Bots, but if possible, do you think there could be a version of mIRC made just for bots?
Perhaps - 2 windows, status - and a debug window for all errors.
Confugartion handling would be done by modifying the ini file, so there'd be no need to recreate the option menu if that would prove to be a problem.
I think it would be pretty cool I would use it in a heart beat, no need for tcl or php anymore. Just a nice mirc program that compiles the scripts and serves as a daemon. Low mem usage as always

mIRC could be a nice IRC bot indeed (and lot of addons exists).

But remember, it's aim is to be an (or THE ) IRC -client-.

C/C++, Perl, PHP or eggdrop will always be the best way to make an IRC Bot.

yeah, I usually use php or tcl (learning) but I find mIRC is so flexible. Infact when I make bots, I use an mIRC script a created to act as a server (yes it's long) which helps out a lot.
If mIRC can function as a server, why not a good bot?

I'm going to make that my question to you. If mIRC can function as a server as it is, why not a good bot?

My point being that it would be a bad idea in general to make a permanent or high-traffic bot using mIRC's scripting langauge because it's relatively slow (making a "mIRC just for bots" wouldn't make it any faster). So if it's only going to be used for testing purposes or low-traffic needs then why not create a bot using mIRC as-is?

I have, in several instances - just thinking that perhaps a few modification could lower memory usage and slightly improve performance.

Yes, there are still other alternatives (better ones possibly) however mIRC funcionaility for me is great. Although I enjoy using php, and there is the 'windows' factor where using mirc to run bots is concerned, I still believe that it would be real neat to have a version of mirc made specifically to run as a bot.

I'd like to add this
Since I just found out that the error I received while testing out my server had to do with the limitations of the os, perhaps and optional (Close Window) would be pretty nice.
Instead of having all the channel windows remain open, perhaps they could be optional closed, or never created without sending the PART #channel message to the IRC Server <- good start I guess

No bot version until mIRC have only one developer -> Khaled.. Maybe in the future ;] He just don't have time for a bot version/linux version..
Anyway.. mIRC is great Thanks Khaled..
Now.. We need to learn TCL..

I understand the issues where creating a version for linux is concerned so I wouldn't try to touch that topic. But for the current windows os - I think it would be pretty neat.

Just one more way mIRC make using IRC great

There are no features in mIRC that you could remove, without someone saying "hey, i use that feature in my bot!" Every feature has its use, and the GUI interface makes it easy to monitor for trouble.

Slap mIRC and Real VNC on any remote terminal, and you have your bot.

- Raccoon

think out of the box.
Slap 199 channels on your bot and you are SOL due to limitations of the Windows OS restricting there being more than 200 open windows at one given time.

There are certain things that could be remove to lower memory usage and improve stability.
Not saying they have to function like eggdrops, php bots, perl bots etc.. just minute improvements.

If you have to join more than 200 channels (I don't know why you'd need to do that) then writing the bot in mIRC is probably a very bad idea.

Odd i got to 388 windows before it bit the dust, using 2000 server, wonder if its just a version limitation.

Actually it's a limitation of Windows (there was a post about this a couple of days ago).

Well i dont think thats the case, i told you i made 388 windows i used this

test {
var %i = 1
while (1) {
window -e @. $+ %i
echo -s Made window %i
inc %i
}
}

i changed it to window -ed @. $+ %i
and just went to 426, ok there not channel windows but the number of windows doesnt appear to be the limiting factor so im assuming its some resource that runs out.

lol i just did it on a win98 pc with 64meg of ram , and its still going 1000+ and counting (-ed option)

Try opening windows with side-listboxes.. maybe that's what's being limited, not only ordinary windows.. just guessing.

used
window -el40 @. $+ %i

got 347 but also had some other stuff open at the time, so that might account for the difference.

The win98 pc is still opening windows although its slowed down alot, its at @.3917 and clicking away slowly.

I havent noticed the hdd going, but im wondering if its using swapfile, and just getting bigger, while in Nt u can set your peak swapfile size, so it just cans out when you reach it.

Just gonna try it on xp pro and 2K now see what i get to.
2K got 401 -el40 windows
XP got 380 -el40 windows

So on a totally stupid script with no purpiose to it, WIN98 wins hands down at 3972 and still going. (not -el40 tho just -e im not starting it again now)

So i would say window limit must be a resources thing.

it depends on your internet memory... when all those windows are filled with text, and active chatting, your mem usage will go up. once it reaches max you can't create any more windows...

so creating 350+ empty windows isn't a big problem...
maintaining 350+ active windows is

Sorry i dont have any internet memory, my isp didnt provide that service, and wouldnt stop laughing at me when i asked for it. <joke>

If u mean ram, well i increased my ram and also decreased it, and it didnt seem to make any difference, i also increased my swapfile, and that made no diff either.

Oh for anyone whoes iterested, the win98 pc finally crapped out at 4068 windows, and its swapfile had not increased in size, so who knows what the resource is, if its one at all.

*cough* typo :-P internal*

I got hooked testing a server using

alias starttest {
var %x = 0
while (%x < 500) {
inc %x
timer 1 2 join $chr(35) $+ $rand(0,999) $+ $rand(a,z) $+ $rand(a,z) $+ $rand(a,z)
}
}
raw 439:*: notice davey $chan(0)