18:27 <eebs> Hi, I have a plugin that has a number of matches, and a listen_to :channel with a specific method set. Is there any way to determine if one of the matches were already triggered from inside the listen_to method?

18:28 <eebs> i.e., don't run the listen_to if one of the matches already ran?

18:30 <dominikh> not with a listen_to, no. matches can be put in groups, where only the first matching one in that group will execute

18:30 <dominikh> of course a listener can be turned into a match with an empty pattern and no prefix/suffix set

18:31 <eebs> oh okay. so I could change the listener to an empty pattern match and put them all in the same group, with the empty pattern match last

18:32 <dominikh> so something like http://sprunge.us/IPbX (completely untested for typos etc) should work, assuming that foo and bar are also exclusive

18:32 <dominikh> right

18:32 <eebs> cool, thanks!

18:59 <eebs> does react_on: :action only match on actions, or would that matcher also match if it weren't an action

19:00 <dominikh> only actions

19:00 <eebs> okay. so I should create two matchers that specify the same method, one with react_on: :action in order to match both text and actions?

19:01 <dominikh> remember that normal messages include actions

19:02 <eebs> yes, with 'action ' prepended. I suppose I could just put that in my regex

19:02 <dominikh> no, not with "action " prepended. well, sort of. it's a CTCP message, with CTCP markers. so yeah, if you do want to apply a regexp, it's easiest to have two matchers

19:03 <eebs> well, it's actually my empty regex :P

19:04 <eebs> I'm trying to get 'high fives X' and '/me high fives X' to both match

19:11 <dominikh> one sec

19:12 <dominikh> eebs: http://sprunge.us/ENAE

19:12 <dominikh> pick your poison. Hack is, well, hacky but shorter

19:13 <dominikh> NoHack is the somewhat cleaner way

19:13 <dominikh> (of course you'd move the common code into its own method)

19:13 <eebs> *nod* thanks, I'll take a look at this

19:15 <eebs> To give you some context, I'm attempting to implement some of the basic features of xkcd's Bucket (https://github.com/zigdon/xkcd-Bucket) to learn cinch a bit. Really enjoying cinch so far, simple but powerful

19:15 <dominikh> (and a mess when dealing with actions ;))

19:15 <eebs> :P

19:16 <dominikh> personally I'd use the NoHack solution

19:16 <dominikh> the Hack one is leaking protocol details into the code

19:16 <eebs> yeah, I'm fine with more verbosity if it makes it clearer