Subnostr

I mean, you could probably include some links to some of SimpleX's basic functionality in a nostr client without too much difficulty provided you're proficient in Haskell. But it wouldn't be an actual integration with Nostr. It would basically just be shortcuts to a seperately installed SimpleX client within the Nostr client. Personally, I wouldn't find value in that, but maybe some people would. I certainly encourage you to give it a shot. Frankenstein coding can lead to some amazing results!

Low Information Voter 1y ago

Hahaha your last line is gold :D

Its not adding a lot of additional value, I agree 100%, but that's kinda the point. Our Nostr devs reinvent the wheel a lot, and the SimpleX wheel already has iron rims and all-tension sinew spokes.

Adopt it into the tribe already, so we can go conquer Europe.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

SLCW 1y ago

One thing that makes it difficult is the fact that virtually all of SimpleX is original coding. It hardly borrows from any other projects, or uses anything standard. Add that to the fact that it's 100% Haskell and it's easy to see why it's a very difficult codebase to work with.

Low Information Voter 1y ago

I agree. And my Haskell experience is zero. Sad.

SLCW 1y ago

I took one look at the code and I immediately wanted to hang myself.

Silberengel 1y ago

Yeah, that's the whole point. It's just integrated superficially, in the display. You can make two things look like one thing, by changing the way they're displayed to the end user.