Josh 37 Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 So I have some pretty huge bots, and sometimes they can take up to 10 minutes just to open. I was looking for ways to slim down my bot code, and I noticed that the private bot bank helps this a lot. Its like using the define command (includes) without the need for the commands to exist inside the bot itself. instead the code looks something like this private bot bank command (34) You also have the added benefit of being able to access those commands from any bot you open. You don't have to open a specific bot that contains a specific command. I see a lot of people on the forums complaining about how to bot bank sucks, and I would have to say that I agree with that statement when it comes to the public bot bank. But I do have to say that the private bot bank helps a lot with slimming down your code, and ultimately speeding up the efficiency of ubot. The one thing that does suck about the private bot bank is syncing commands that you make changes to. This can take up to a couple minutes sometimes. Anyone else using this? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nimbystripes 0 Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 I am new here and just thinking what exactly is a private bot bank? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
UBotBuddy 331 Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 Nope! I am hoping they bring back the "Include" node. I want to store my bots that way on my own resources. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Praney Behl 314 Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 Nope! I am hoping they bring back the "Include" node. I want to store my bots that way on my own resources. I second you Buddy! Not a fan of using the Private Bot Bank after loosing hours of work. Include command was great, hope to see it back. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AutoIM 5 Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 Nope! I am hoping they bring back the "Include" node. I want to store my bots that way on my own resources. I second you Buddy! Not a fan of using the Private Bot Bank after loosing hours of work. Include command was great, hope to see it back. Same for me guys, not having the 'include' is definitely a step backwards in my opinion too, which seems to be the con-census from those who appreciated it in v3.5. In my own opinion, the private bot-bank is something that could have been in an earlier version, which would then have evolved in to the 'include' command. Seems like we've taken a step backwards in this respect. The problem is though, that v4 has a great many improvements over v3.5, and to give credit where it is due, the dev team (or should that be dev person?) has to be congratulated on providing a platform which in many ways is far superior. Unfortunately, it also incorporates some features and functionality which have not only stayed the same as they were, but have actually gone one step backwards! Phil Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Legend 181 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 I've been asking about include for ages and every mention of it is completely ignored by staff... I talked to seth on skype and he didn't even know it was missing and had no idea if there were any plans to 'include' it again... http://www.ubotstudio.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/huh.gif Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Josh 37 Posted July 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 I've been asking about include for ages and every mention of it is completely ignored by staff... I talked to seth on skype and he didn't even know it was missing and had no idea if there were any plans to 'include' it again... http://www.ubotstudio.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/huh.gif So how did the include command work in v3.5? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Praney Behl 314 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 So how did the include command work in v3.5? Well you could include subs from another script without having the code pasted in your current script. Just point to the location of the script you want to include and thats it. As they say "it doesn't need to be fancy, as long as it works". Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Josh 37 Posted July 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 how did this work when compiling bots? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Praney Behl 314 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 you have to keep the .ubot file in the app. folder. Yeah I know what you are thinking, it is like giving your code away. Just change the file extension from .ubot to say .dev(Not sure if it works in Ver. 3.15, as it used to work in earlier versions) Unless the user knows what it is they wont mess out. Its risky but the only available option. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Legend 181 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 You could also rename it on the fly... so store it as an .exe file or .dat file and then rename it before you use it and rename it again when you're done... http://www.ubotstudio.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Praney Behl 314 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Yes thats right, but the only thing stopping someone from stealing your code is changing the extention back to .ubot Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Josh 37 Posted July 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Yes thats right, but the only thing stopping someone from stealing your code is changing the extention back to .ubot Well if they could just fix the performance issues with ubot it would solve a lot of problems. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Praney Behl 314 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Infact I would like to suggest a command that could read ubot code and include it on the fly. Reason how it could be all difference and better is that you could encrypt the Ubot code to include and while reading it in the command you can add procedure to decrypt it before the command reads it. Well pretty much like read from file function I'll create an enhancement suggestion request, only thing is it may be added to the stack LOL! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Praney Behl 314 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Well if they could just fix the performance issues with ubot it would solve a lot of problems. Big Time! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Praney Behl 314 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Here it is: http://www.ubotstudio.com/forum/index.php?/topic/10708-suggestion-enhancement-require-for-include-command-in-v3x-to-bring-it-in-v-4x/ Just created the Enhancement suggestion. Let see what the Dev. have to say about it if... they do. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AutoIM 5 Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Yes thats right, but the only thing stopping someone from stealing your code is changing the extention back to .ubot What about zipping it with a password, use shell/ to unzip using the command line as the bot starts up, and then delete the unzipped file when finished. Just a thought? You don't even have to call it include.zip, for example call it include.mif (My Include File) to mimimise prying eyes, and if anyone want's to open it in a hex editor, well, you aren't going to stop them whatever it's hidden as! If you really want to get paranoid about it, then hide it inside an image file Phil Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.