Upcoming Detection List

ok, as i see no activity on branches, i suppose no suggestions are left on what is done.

so here it is, brand new list format. it’s “initial release” so post eventual improvements in this thread.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<Profiles>
	<ClientProfilesV3>
		<DetectionProfile>
			<DetectionEntry ProfileID="1">
				<Name>DC++</Name>
				<Cheat></Cheat>
				<Comment>User Client</Comment>
				<RawToSend>0</RawToSend>
				<ClientFlag>0</ClientFlag>
				<IsEnabled>1</IsEnabled>
				<InfFields>
					<InfField Field="TA" Pattern="^<\+\+ V:%[VE],(M:[AP5]{1}),H:%[HN]/%[HR]/%[HO],S:%[SL]>$"/>
					<InfField Field="LO" Pattern="^EXTENDEDPROTOCOLABCABCABCABCABCABC$"/>
					<InfField Field="PK" Pattern="^DCPLUSPLUS%[VE]ABCABC$"/>
				</InfFields>
			</DetectionEntry>
		</DetectionProfile>
	</ClientProfilesV3>
	<Params/>
	<ProfileInfo>
		<DetectionProfile>
			<Version>N/A</Version>
			<Message>N/A</Message>
			<URL>N/A</URL>
		</DetectionProfile>
	</ProfileInfo>
</Profiles>

kk when the time is ready for some testing and client list making just tell me and ill start making the lists

question CID Detection is that a possibly for the new CMD ?

i guess u checked my suggestion on XML file

i’m not quite sure if you get this right, if you’re asking if you can detect CID.

you can detect, CID, SID, and any other INF field. all params are from infmap so it’s like UserCommand, where in UC param is in format %[userFL], here it’s just %[FL].
so to detect CID you have to add inffield to profile

<InfField Field="ID" Pattern="^AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA$"/>

@todo add formatted params, like %[VE2] and so on.

note, there are no params in params list (check xml struct)

Ok so i can make these parameters myself in the file then ?

like in the old lists

well yes, but i suggest to use regex only where you really need it in params :stuck_out_tongue:

kk mind explaining why ?

i noticed a problem in the current CMD that made it detect it wrong and that was (M:[AP5]{1}) don’t really know why it misses on that part but it does

dunno what’s wrong… but hmm… how you checked it btw?
why minimize regex usage? to speedup match. all params are resolved before match, so there is no reason for using more and more patterns.

in the current CMD used in all clients has this problem i checked against tag and then against regexp and in those cases it matches but when entered into client it mismatched (in this case i used apex)

Any Progress ?

Still waiting to begin testing here

but what do you want?
in this matter imo, there is nothing else to do.

if crise include it in upcoming release, you will be able to use it (as i’m working on rsx++, still, i think he is going to have release sooner than me)

Well it wasn’t included in the latest beta of apex

i don’t have access to soruce as well as to builds so i don’t know if it’s included or not :wink:

Well I was planning on waiting with the CDM until you are back in business with RSX… one reason why I have not kept any hurry with the gui either.

i’m back and currently working on couple of things, mainly improving stability + some work on next version of plugin api (already stlport is gone, but it’s not quite finished) :slight_smile:

gui by crise

And now that I see it after not looking at it fir a while, I relise that back/next buttons are poorly aligned…

yep, also i will re-design it a bit in near future :slight_smile:

Well may I be curious as to how?

a bit more user-friendly to not move mouse all over the screen :stuck_out_tongue:

Right, I see, regexp tester is going to get moved for the very least…