PPL - better than PersistentPW

BETTER THAN PPW????


Oh i see. It's not compatible with my plugins. I'll think that not a lotta plugins will come out for this.

Hey @kat!, You do realise that these are the requirements

PPL:
requires PowerWire and PowerWire bot access

PersistentPW:
requires PPW/PowerWire bot access

Yes that's right. Who needs to get PW when PPW is already persistent and dosen't require something. I am impressed that you can make a persistent library that turns PW into a persistent version but why do you require PW when PPW dosen't require it at all?

Man i thought this was going to be the nail in the coffin lol.

4NT wrote: Oh i see. It's not compatible with my plugins. I'll think that not a lotta plugins will come out for this.

@4NT, my plugin allows PW to take advantage of new code and dosen't completely rewrite PW. It's more convenient because it is just a plugin.

kat! wrote:

4NT wrote: Oh i see. It's not compatible with my plugins. I'll think that not a lotta plugins will come out for this.

@4NT, my plugin allows PW to take advantage of new code and dosen't completely rewrite PW. It's more convenient because it is just a plugin.

@4NT @kat!

If i have to say so myself (and i am the developer of PowerWire which both are based on/require to work)

PersistentPW is in fact better than PPL and WAY MORE CONVENIENT.

Got some proven info that you can't deny

PersistentPW: 48%
PowerWire (without PPL): 41%
PowerWire (with PPL): 8%
None (Home-grown Terzwire): 5%