Add this:<p><a href="https://github.com/rongarret/tweetnacl/blob/master/ratchet.lisp" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/rongarret/tweetnacl/blob/master/ratchet.l...</a><p>and you can turn this into a state-of-the art encrypted chat.<p>(Note that to <i>really</i> turn this into a secure chat you need to also add key management code. I'm working on that part now.)
When I found both client.py and client.lisp, I thought it would be nice to see direct lisp/python comparison. However, turns out Python version does much more that Lisp one (it maintains edit field even if other people send the messages), so no direct comparison is possible.<p>Author, can you add a simplified python client with exactly the same functionality as the lisp one?
I'm learning Lisp right now so I'll definitely try this out when I get home. It's nice to go and read other's Lisp projects.<p>I love the brevity of this code! Awesome work.<p>Are you on Lainchan?
Cool.<p>I'm not sure that using quicklisp that way is kosher. Quicklisp doesn't allow you to pin a particular version of a dependency. The upshot is that your code that works today may not work tomorrow.<p>I've been looking for a best practice and all I can seem to come up with is make a bundle and include it in your repo.<p><a href="https://www.quicklisp.org/beta/bundles.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.quicklisp.org/beta/bundles.html</a>
What I do not understand: Why not write a simple IRC (or even XMPP) client – but an “IRC-like” client? The documentation is out there. Do people feel special when their software is incompatible with older software without having features that make incompatibility a necessity?<p>Internet Relay Chat: Client Protocol <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2812" rel="nofollow">https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2812</a><p>Internet Relay Chat: Server Protocol <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2813" rel="nofollow">https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2813</a>