0.700

Ok, so 0.700 took a while longer than I had planned but well, here we are. It’s more of a preview of what’s to come, right now it’s pretty unstable (it’ll crash pretty often), I don’t trust the new queue code (so it might corrupt your downloads) and it’s compiled with a technology preview compiler (so it might actually be someone else’s fault that it crashes =)

15 Responses to 0.700

  1. robynhud says:

    It should be labeled as alpha, because it is unusable at this time for other things than testing. I remember when 0.699 was labeled as beta for a long time. That version worked without problems, but 0.700 is not even labeled beta and it actually works like an alpha.

    I use Vista and DC++ crashes each time on exit. The public hubs cannot be sorted by name, country, etc, clicking on the columns does nothing.

    And you reduced the size of the panel with Settings. The translators will not be happy. Really, you must make this panel as big as in the 0.699 version, if not bigger (or to be manully resizable).

  2. serrebi says:

    I downloaded 0.700[it was listed on filehipo] and I’m blind and I noticed some accessibility improvements! There’s some strange list view issues, like the list view when your browsing someone doesn’t seem to read properly, but , it’s deffinitly an improvement over any client I’ve ever used! I’ll be watching this one very closely! Good job!

  3. bigmuscledc says:

    It works really ugly. For me, it’s totally unusable, because when I share some stuff, hash it and try to login to some hub, it just sends random number as my share size, so I can’t login. I shared 13 GB, sometimes it sends 800 MB, sometimes weird negative values etc..

  4. ejs1920 says:

    Is there a bug that stops valknut and ApexDC for doing segmented downloads from DC++ 0.700? The download stops after the first segment.

    For the first segment, valknut sends
    $ADCGET file TTH/JHWNGMBPRRZNCQT6Q6FZPKOUKEOLQJAVAN3FHGI 0 1048576 ZL1|
    and receives from dc++
    $ADCSND file TTH/JHWNGMBPRRZNCQT6Q6FZPKOUKEOLQJAVAN3FHGI 0 1048576 ZL1|

    For the next segment, valknut sends
    $ADCGET file TTH/JHWNGMBPRRZNCQT6Q6FZPKOUKEOLQJAVAN3FHGI 1048576 1048576 ZL1|
    but receives from dc++:
    $ADCSND file TTH/JHWNGMBPRRZNCQT6Q6FZPKOUKEOLQJAVAN3FHGI 0 2097152 ZL1|

    The response from DC++ seems incorrect – it says it’s sending the file starting from 0 again.

    Is this a bug or is DC++ changing the protocol?

  5. mikejj says:

    robynhud you fail at reading arne’s comment.
    I agree with you serrebi, there will still be some issues, but the more people find these little errors, the sooner they’ll be fixed :)
    bigmuscledc i noticed that same trouble. I was also hashing at the time, so maybe some common problem there ?

  6. bigmuscledc says:

    also it crashes when playing with file priority in queue

  7. optionwizz says:

    Thanks for dc++ and the faster hashing. when used to a PtokaX DC Hub 0.3.5.0 [debug] with ! ! ! ‘][‘€RM‡ÑÅ’][‘ØR V1.Rev 7c ! ! ! By ¨˜”°º•Hawk•º°”˜¨ and Robocop, a visual c++ runtime crash occurs when doing a right-click access to the robocop menu.
    Statement is:
    Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library
    This application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an unusual way.
    Please contactthe application’s support team for more information.

    I am on Vista-SP1, 2.66 Quad Core, 2gig ram, avg virus suite, no problems on dc++0.699 or Apex dc++1.0B4

  8. robynhud says:

    Mikejj, I have read the blog entry. But 0.700 is not even labeled as beta, which is strange. When 0.699 was released, it was in a “beta” state for a long time, although it did work without any problems.

    I understand that a lot of things have changed in 0.700, but really I have never seen a beta software that is so bad (I am speaking about important software, like DC++ is). I am sure it was not tested on Vista. On the webpage it should be stated clearly that only those that want to test it should download it, not those that want to actually use it.

  9. Fredrik Ullner says:

    optionwizz: Right clicking is broken, we know. The next version has it fixed (I think). (

    robynhud: I don’t recall 0.699 being anymore labeled “beta” than 0.700 is. The unstable tag is there for a reason, and the fact that 0.699 and previous unstable versions were stable insofar your experience, doesn’t mean that all versions that are labeled unstable should be considered “stable”. We can’t possible test every system configuration, mostly because we don’t have those operating systems available to us.

  10. pityke says:

    Maybe it’s my fault but I can’t type ! , ” , and $ characters for some reason. If I try to copy these marks from somewhere else, it sends them to the hub. It is a bit annyoing when you try to write hub commands. I’m on an XP sp2.

  11. robynhud says:

    Fredrik Ullner, when a software goes from version 0.x to 0.y (y>x) it is assumed that the new version is better than the old one (maybe a little unstable, but not too much). In the case of DC++ the new version is a complete failure with regard to its functionality and stability. It does not work well at all and it has been in production for almost a year. And I did not say to test DC++ on all the possible configurations, but it is imperative to test it on Windows Vista, that is installed on almost 20 % of the PCs, and that percentage will double in 6 months as new computers are bought. It is a major mistake that DC++ does not work well under Vista (as I said, a simple operation like sorting the public hubs is not possible).

  12. bigmuscledc says:

    sorry, but Windows Vista is installed only on 3% computers and it’s very buggy. For example, in my StrongDC++ I had to make a workaround, so it would work in Vista, because Vista wasn’t be able to create standard menu and app crashed. Last week, MS released a patch for it :))

  13. Fredrik Ullner says:

    robynhud: Who is assuming that the new version “0.x” is stable? Normally, a new “major” version (that is, “0.x”) is considered as a milestone and not necessarily as a stable version.

    No one is claiming that DC++ 0.700 is stable, or even that previous “0.x” jumps in DC++’s versioning system were considered stable right off the bat. (0.400 wasn’t. 0.401 was [according to many people’s standards].)

    Nevermind the fact that the entire DC++ project is still “officially” considered in alpha/beta stage; as the “0.” version also denote.

    I believe it was important to release the new version at this time so people could give input on what’s happening (otherwise, it’s very few people who do).

    We cannot test DC++ on a system if we don’t have the system. Eg, I can’t afford, at the moment, to buy Windows Vista “just to test DC++ on it”. (And I doubt that “20%” use it, but that’s beside the point.) This is also why it’s good that we released 0.700; so those users who have these systems can report the issues and we could possibly fix them. (Remember; We do all this on our spare time.)

  14. robynhud says:

    Oh, come on Fredrik Ullner, we’re speaking of DC++ here, not a software for ecommerce. I don’t advise you to use a pirated copy of Vista, but if you can’t afford it, just download a DVD image and use it in trial mode (MS permits that you use Vista for a month if you don’t input a serial number at the start of the installation). So you will have the time to test DC++ on it. Heck, if I was Microsoft I’ll just send you a free copy of Vista so that people could migrate to the new OS without losing DC++.

    It doesn’t matter if Vista is on 5%, 10% or 20% of the computers, DC++ must work on this OS no matter what, because surely SP1 will fix a lot of the bugs and people will be more eager to buy Vista.

    And all the DC++ users greatly appreciate the work of the developers, but 0.700 was unusable for many so you must understand the somewhat angry reactions (not from me, I am not a heavy user of DC++) after more than a year of waiting. DC++ is found on a multitude of downloading sites (for exaample Softpedia) that offer only the latest version, so a new user that downloaded 0.700 and didn’t work will probably never use DC++ again (yes I know that 0.701 is out).

  15. I wonder how this vista bugs come here.

    DC++ DOES work on Vista. At least, previous versions did that perfectly. And DC++ 0.700 and 0.701 is a buggy software no matter what OS you use..

    Just when you report a crash it looks like this:

    “Hi, my dc++ crashes, you need to do this and this to trigger that”
    “What OS are you using?”
    “Vista”
    “AH, GOTCHA! Vista is a shit”

    No, DC++ can’t be a shit. If you tell you’re using Vista, Vista is the shit. No matter that you can trigger the same bug on XP too. Whatever.

    I think we should have not release a totally untested software, no matter that every other devs say here that “oh fine, this way we can get bug reports”. No! There’s no need to release a software just to find out that it’s totally buggy and everyone can trigger it to crash in 10 minutes.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: