Wizards Den

10:41 AM

Oh, by the way @NiKo did you see my daughter? I posted several pics over the time, got a new one when she started first grade couple of weeks ago: i.stack.imgur.com/VLSK0.png :-)

overactor

10:56 AM

>>alive

Shadow Wizard

@overactor no more cloud, @Pro plans to buy his own cloud soon.

Until then, @FOX arrives only when his master arrives...

overactor

Too bad

I just saw the >>yes command, pretty cool stuff

Shadow Wizard

11:14 AM

@overactor lol, yeah... the >>yes and >>no are @Pro's doing, really neat :D

overactor

11:31 AM

what happens if you mistype a command and get a did_you_mean and reply with

>>yep

?

From reading the code it seems likely that FOX would suggest >>yes as a response and then using >>yes would actually execute the original command

Shadow Wizard

@overactor hehe, probably "command not found, did you mean yes?" ;)

overactor

Also a possible issue with the did_you_mean module:

>>cat Command not found.

Shadow Wizard

Well, nothing can be perfect.... poor bot can be deceived easily.

overactor

Maybe I should push @ProgramFox to completely redesign it with me again and release it as SE-Chatbot 3.0 :)

Shadow Wizard

@overactor you mean adding "did you mean" feature to the "parent" code, e.g. of Smokey as well?

currently it just ignores commands that don't exist.

overactor

11:45 AM

@ShadowWizard That one doesn't use the bot framework, does it?

The bot framework and smokey are both built on chatexchange though I think

Shadow Wizard

@overactor oh, no idea... it must use some framework, no? Always assumed all those bots share the same core, written in Python.

Maybe only the login part is the same though.

overactor

chatexchange is a framework to use the SE chat

SE_Chatbot is a framework to make bots that uses chatexchange

Fox9000 is a bot that uses SE_Chatbot + some extra modules

Shadow Wizard

oh. Makes sense...

overactor

I think smokey is built directly onto chatexchange

Shadow Wizard

Oh well... so no cool features for Smokey. :)

ProgramFOX

1:16 PM

@overactor Hmm I don't see problems with the current design, but I'm open to suggestions.

overactor

@ProgramFOX it was entirely a joke, I see no problems either.

ProgramFOX

oh haha, hadn't noticed :P

overactor

sarcasm is hard, even harder over chat

my bad :)

could you run FOX?

I'd like to give the >>yes command a spin

FOX 9000

Bot started.

ProgramFOX

there you go @overactor ^

overactor

1:22 PM

>>flop test

FOX 9000

@overactor Command not found. Did you mean: flip?

overactor

>>yep

FOX 9000

@overactor Command not found. Did you mean: reply?

overactor

>>no

FOX 9000

@overactor Command suggestion cleared.

overactor

1:22 PM

>>yess

FOX 9000

@overactor Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

overactor

>>yes

>>flop test

did I break it?

>>alive

ProgramFOX

yes you did

let me check the logs

overactor

I'm sorry @FOX

I only skimmed the code, but from what I read, I thought a double did_you_mean would work

ProgramFOX

RecursionError, @overactor

I've got a stack trace

overactor

1:25 PM

Was the problem maybe reading event.user.id from a generated command?

hmm

ProgramFOX

so I can try to fix this

overactor

Max recursion depth reached?

ProgramFOX

exactly

well it makes sense that it does

because only the last command suggestion is stored

so the suggestion is 'yes'

you do a >>yes

overactor

ooh

ProgramFOX

and it executes 'yes' again

overactor

1:28 PM

I though it stored a stack of suggestions

ProgramFOX

nope

overactor

and the yes would trigger the previous suggestion

ProgramFOX

Yeah, no, I only store one suggestion because a stack wouldn't be useful.

but I should maybe re-write it to a stack for this situation

overactor

do you ever clear the suggestions (except for on >>no)?

ProgramFOX

I think it does, let me check

FOX 9000

1:30 PM

Bot started.

ProgramFOX

>>cta test test

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

ProgramFOX

>>cat test test test

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX test test test

ProgramFOX

>>yes

FOX 9000

1:31 PM

@ProgramFOX There are no command suggestions for you (anymore).

ProgramFOX

so I do

overactor

Ah I see it now

in the decorator

You could make it a stack, and pop the last suggestion before calling it

ProgramFOX

pop it after calling it

or wait, no

it depends on what "it" means in the context

if it means "the suggestion", then yes, before calling it

overactor

That's what I meant

when can you clear it though?

ProgramFOX

I was just wondering that too

overactor

1:35 PM

Basically, if an entire command goes through without triggering did_you_mean, suggestions can be cleared

ProgramFOX

that should work

overactor

but where do you attach that logic?

can't be where it is now because that decorator can get called multiple times in case of a cascading did_you_mean or nested commands

ProgramFOX

hmm

I have a different suggestion:

we just shouldn't override the suggestion if the suggestion is 'yes'

overactor

that's probably the better solution

ProgramFOX

it's going to save us a lot of headache

overactor

1:38 PM

then you don't need to explicitly clear suggestions, right?

ProgramFOX

what do you mean?

Shadow Wizard

@ProgramFOX lol!

overactor

else:
    suggestions[event.user.id] = None

will you still need that in command_with_didyoumean?

ProgramFOX

its point is only so a >>yes doesn't work anymore after a valid command because it doesn't make sense anymore in the context

so I don't think I should remove it

overactor

but then

>>flop test

FOX 9000

1:40 PM

@overactor Command not found. Did you mean: flip?

overactor

>>yess

FOX 9000

@overactor Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

overactor

Ah wait

I just got your point

ProgramFOX

I think I can see where you want to go to

unless I don't

but the 'flip' suggestion would just be kept in that case

overactor

I thought you'd make a stack if the suggested command was >>yes

and replace otherwise

ProgramFOX

1:42 PM

ah no

that has no point

overactor

which would be absolutely asinine

your idea is waaaay more elegant

ProgramFOX

and way easier

overactor

yup

Only weird thing about it is that the bot will reply to your original misspelled >>yes

or won't it?

ah no

It will reply to the actual >>yes command

That's very acceptable

ProgramFOX

yes it always replies to the >>yes command

makes things easier

overactor

>>cat {{flop test}}

FOX 9000

1:45 PM

@overactor Command not found. Did you mean: flip?

overactor

>>yes

FOX 9000

@overactor There are no command suggestions for you (anymore).

ProgramFOX

huh

overactor

hmm, that's a shame

the nested command causes a second pass of bot.command()

ProgramFOX

oh I guess it gets cleared

because of the >>cat

it's easy to fix by removing the explicit clear, but the question is if that's good or not

overactor

1:47 PM

I don't think it is

It would only execute the inner command anyway

ProgramFOX

true

overactor

Having nested commands and did you mean play nice with eachother would be very difficult

I think

ProgramFOX

yeah, likely

they are different modules

Shadow Wizard

Maybe just abort "did you mean" in case of nested commands?

overactor

the problem is that did you mean doesn't know about nested commands

There might be one way

Shadow Wizard

1:51 PM

@overactor it can just check the raw command, if it contains {{ then abort. Not elegant, but should work...

overactor

you could look at the actual message of the command and find the command text in it

ProgramFOX

@ShadowWizard The problem is that didyoumean would have to assume that 'nestedcommands' is included.

overactor

then replace the command word in the actual message and resend that as a simulated chat message

ProgramFOX

We shouldn't make such assumptions.

People who run bots can make whatever modifications to disable nested commands if they want to.

Modules should be as isolated and independent of each other as much as possible.

overactor

current behavior is acceptable by the way

>>yes only works on the main command in a message

FOX 9000

1:53 PM

@overactor There are no command suggestions for you (anymore).

overactor

@ProgramFOX what do you think of my "find and replace in the message" suggestion?

ProgramFOX

@overactor I don't exactly understand it tbh

Shadow Wizard

@ProgramFOX hmm.... well, still better than risking crash or spending tons of efforts trying to have it handle all the cases. No?

overactor

a command function gets a the following arguments: (cmd, bot, args, msg, event)

Shadow Wizard

>>no I don't want fish

ProgramFOX

1:56 PM

@ShadowWizard Crashes have nothing to do with what we're discussing now.

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Nothing to clear; there are no command suggestions stored for you.

Shadow Wizard

@ProgramFOX oh. OK, didn't read everything, just skimmed through the messages.

>>

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found.

ProgramFOX

@ShadowWizard The crashes part is already handled :)

Shadow Wizard

>>yes

FOX 9000

1:57 PM

@ShadowWizard There are no command suggestions for you (anymore).

Shadow Wizard

>>flop flip

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: flip?

Shadow Wizard

>>yess

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

Shadow Wizard

>>yes

ProgramFOX

1:57 PM

@overactor Yeah... go on.

overactor

did_you_mean looks at cmd to find suggestions, right?

ProgramFOX

@ShadowWizard thanks, I still had to make the code changes >.<

Shadow Wizard

umm.... oopss. :D

ProgramFOX

@overactor yep.

Shadow Wizard

55 secs ago, by ProgramFOX

@ShadowWizard The crashes part is already handled :)

Thought you mean, well, handled and deployed. ;)

ProgramFOX

1:58 PM

@ShadowWizard handled in the discussion :P

overactor

and cmd is a string?

"cat Hello, World!" in case of >>cat Hello, World!

ProgramFOX

yes

overactor

and the msg argument will be ">>cat Hello, World!"

?

ProgramFOX

I think it's a Message instance, but then it's easy to fetch the ">>cat Hello, World!" part

overactor

I thought that was the event arg

ProgramFOX

2:00 PM

oh right

nevermind

yeah you're right, it's a string

overactor

In any case, we could find cmd in msg and replace it by cmd with our suggestion

and simulate an event with the result as message

ProgramFOX

so basically this?

10 mins ago, by ProgramFOX

@ShadowWizard The problem is that didyoumean would have to assume that 'nestedcommands' is included.

11 mins ago, by Shadow Wizard

@overactor it can just check the raw command, if it contains {{ then abort. Not elegant, but should work...

overactor

Not quite, because we don't check for anything explicitly

we just solve the problem more thoroughly and carefully

ProgramFOX

I think I understand your idea now

overactor

I'll give an example

ProgramFOX

2:04 PM

but what happens here?:

overactor

oh yeah

ProgramFOX

>>cat test test {{test test}}

you want to replace 'test test' by your suggestion, right?

overactor

shit

didn't think of that

ProgramFOX

it's either that or an explicit {{ check

neither are good imo

overactor

Gets even more impossible with the >>exec command

Explicit {{ check is an absolute no go

ProgramFOX

2:10 PM

oh yeah >>exec too

overactor

Though if your trying to execute generated commands, you likely don't expect the bot to be able to correct you

Same could be said for nested commands I suppose

We could add an int that tells you where the command starts in the message

ProgramFOX

@overactor That requires data to be passed from nestedcommands to the core to didyoumean though.

overactor

I meant as an argument for command functions

Which does bloat the bot a bit for very specific and narrow functionality

ProgramFOX

so like def command_whatever(cmd, bot, args, msg, event, start)?

overactor

Yeah

ProgramFOX

2:16 PM

how is it useful for the commands though?

overactor

Oh, bot.command would need it too I suppose

No wait, only bot.command

Then a nested bot.command call can use it

But normal command functions don't need to bother with it

ProgramFOX

hmm so give bot.command a 'start' arg, then override and use it in didyoumean?

overactor

Yeah

>>exec could set it to -1 or None

ProgramFOX

It sounds kinda messy but it should work. One question to anser though: do we really want the bot to select an alternative command on its own? And, what happens if the bot can't find an alternative command?

overactor

It would still use the yes command

ProgramFOX

2:21 PM

oh

then it starts getting really messy to implement

overactor

You just save the event with the replaced cmd in the list

On >>yes, you simulate the message

But only if you find an alternative of course

Did you mean might also need to bypass the normal way of returning a value and post the suggestion straight away

It really might not be worth the effort and mess though

ProgramFOX

Yeah, especially the mess. Don't forget that many methods (inside the bot builtins and perhaps outside, when people create modules) override bot.command again, which causes more mess if they don't override it with the 'start' argument.

overactor

That's easily solved with a default parameter value though

ProgramFOX

no

because if a module overrides bot.command with a three-parameter function

then we have a problem

overactor

oh

ProgramFOX

2:28 PM

I'm mostly talking about modules outside the bot builtins anyway.

overactor

How many modules currently exist in the wild?

ProgramFOX

I have no idea about that

overactor

It would be no problem if kwargs got passed

ProgramFOX

wouldn't that still require changes in other modules?

Anyway I guess that's not the biggest problem. I'm also entirely unsure how this entire system could be glued together. Nestedcommands just takes the command suggestion from didyoumean, and didyoumean has no idea that nestedcommands has taken a suggestion already.

afk

overactor

sure

If you type >>cat {{flop test}}

you'll get msg=">>cat {{flop test}}" cmd="cat {{flop test}}" and start=2 on the first pass

this goes through didyoumean fine end cause nestedcommands to create a new command

msg=">>cat {{flop test}}" cmd="flop test" and start=8

NiKoLaPrO

2:41 PM

Hello

overactor

didyoumean checks if "flop" can actually be found at the start of msg[8..], and finds flip as a replacement

@NiKoLaPrO hi

now it saves the event with the msg changed in the dict and aborts the current command and posts its suggestion as a reply directly

if you type >>yes, bot.on_event is called with an event that has msg=">>cat {{flip test}}"

this gets parsed again and should go through fine

if the entire command still contains a mistake after the first correction, didyoumean catches it and suggests another correction

I might have gotten the order in which the commands go through didyoumean wrong, I think nestedcommands intercepts the message before didyoumean does

ProgramFOX

3:03 PM

back

@overactor Aha, I get what you mean.

I'm opening an issue on GitHub

contrary to the RecursionError it's pretty low-priority so I won't do that today

overactor

@ProgramFOX maybe I'll do it at some point

ProgramFOX

sure thing

the issue on GH is open so everyone is free to take it

overactor

Either during my next two lunchbreaks, friday evening or somewhere over the weekend

NiKoLaPrO

5:05 PM

Hello

ProgramFOX

hey

Rubisco

5:25 PM

yO

Or yo.

FOX 9000

Bot started.

ProgramFOX

>>cta testing stuff

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

ProgramFOX

>>yess

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

ProgramFOX

5:32 PM

>>yes

:(

FOX 9000

Bot started.

ProgramFOX

>>cta test test

>>alive

FOX 9000

test test from console

ProgramFOX

>>alive test

oh, websocket failed

>>cta test!

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

ProgramFOX

5:34 PM

>>yse

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

ProgramFOX

>>yes

ok so the same error is still there

FOX 9000

Bot started.

ProgramFOX

>>cta ...

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

ProgramFOX

5:41 PM

uh, I found my bug

FOX 9000

Bot started.

ProgramFOX

>>cta ???

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

ProgramFOX

>>yse

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

ProgramFOX

5:44 PM

>>yes

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX ???

ProgramFOX

!!!

>>cta !!!!

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

ProgramFOX

>>yse

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

ProgramFOX

5:44 PM

>>yess

FOX 9000

@ProgramFOX Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

>>yes

@ProgramFOX !!!!

alright, working

6:31 PM

yay!

@Rub wow, that is a big change.... but good thing you're not DEAD anymore! /cc @MAR

Where have you been, @Rub?

You got a ruby, @Rub?

Rubisco

Dude

Shadow Wizard

@Rub you missed @Joe?

Rubisco

No mass pinging when I'm here.

Shadow Wizard

@Joe you missed @Rub?

OK won't mass ping @Rub while he's here

Rubisco

@Rub you missed @Rub?

Shadow Wizard

6:33 PM

I miss myself every day

@ber miss himself too

@Pro so you made any of the changes you discussed with @overactor, or only the bug fix?

ProgramFOX

only the bug fix

Shadow Wizard

hmm.... fair enough! And any TL;DR about upcoming changes?

>>cat {{time 1}}

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Waiting time set to 1 second.

ProgramFOX

@ShadowWizard github.com/ProgramFOX/SE-Chatbot-Builtins/issues/5

Shadow Wizard

@ProgramFOX huh. Nice!

Will it affect mixed commands of WAG too, like the above?

ProgramFOX

6:36 PM

should be

Shadow Wizard

Or only the didyoumean part?

>>tac {{time 0}}

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

Shadow Wizard

>>yesss

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

Shadow Wizard

>>yes

FOX 9000

6:37 PM

@ShadowWizard Waiting time set to 0 seconds.

Shadow Wizard

Hey @NiKo good to see you again!

>>reply 5270394

FOX 9000

No associated word found for MIM-104.

Shadow Wizard

>>continue MIM-104 radar

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard radar

Shadow Wizard

@FOX9000 sonar

FOX 9000

6:39 PM

@ShadowWizard laser

Shadow Wizard

>>cta hello

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

Shadow Wizard

>>exec {{read 5273334}}

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard There are no command suggestions for you (anymore).

Shadow Wizard

>>cta hello

FOX 9000

6:41 PM

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: cat?

Shadow Wizard

>>yess

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: yes?

Shadow Wizard

>>exec {{read 5273334}}

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard There are no command suggestions for you (anymore).

Shadow Wizard

oh well

Rubisco

6:43 PM

tsk tsk tsk

Sha what did you do?

Shadow Wizard

>>cat {{ping Rub}} {{read 5070604}} {{read 3642430}}

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard @Rub nothing XD hides behind @FOX9000

Rubisco

You hide behind yourself?

I found ya!

Shadow Wizard

Smart bot

Rubisco

You're behind yourself

Shadow Wizard

6:46 PM

That's a sure recipe for infinite loop

>>hide behind yourself

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: define?

Shadow Wizard

>>maybe

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: gameban?

Shadow Wizard

>>nope

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Command not found. Did you mean: help?

Shadow Wizard

6:47 PM

>>yes

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard I'm FOX 9000, ProgramFOX's chatbot. You can find the source code on GitHub. You can get a list of all commands by running >>listcommands, or you can run >>help command to learn more about a specific command.

Shadow Wizard

7:13 PM

>>cat {{read 5011397 1738521 5049138}}

FOX 9000

@ShadowWizard Poor @Bart pinged again

Transcript for