Daniel (dB.) Doubrovkine
Daniel (dB.) Doubrovkine
While that may work, I suspect there's going to be a lot of edge cases. Of course you should show us whatever you have and PR improvements that make it...
As long as we preserve backwards compatibility or make a clear breaking change and allow raw data to be retrieved I'd take a PR.
I think this is because the buffer for the web socket is flushed later. I see two options: ``` EM.next_tick do client.say ... end ``` Or `EM.defer` for a long...
I am down with a global option to defer execution of all commands, including regex parsing. Would love a PR, please!
Can you try to turn this into a failing spec and make a PR? We (you) should be able to fix it from there.
That seems consistent with what I saw. Would love a PR with proper README/UPGRADING documentation and an option to override this behavior just like for bot messages.
1. I think that yes, that's what I meant. But really I only care about being able to turn off the behavior you're introducing. 2. Both? Either? Make it configurable...
I think this is about right, but since you know the name upfront you could put it inside the `scan` with `/bot|mybot|whateverbot/` if you want to optimize. I'd love this...
Actually even better, maybe we should add a supported handler like `mention do |client, data, ...|` that wraps this up with tests & al? That'd be a great PR.
You're right @gsmetal. I also think whatever you come up with could work for any mention, so it could support `mention do ...` which would be a bot mention and...