[sldev] message_template.msg ordering and packing : attention
jhurliman at wsu.edu
Fri Mar 16 00:20:32 PDT 2007
> I have a hard time accepting this as a bug, I do agree that it really
> isn't elegant, and makes things more complicated than it really needs
> to be, without any gains.
> Yes, I agree, it could have been implemented differently, and the
> results would be easier to understand, but is it really a bug?
Since we are down to semantics now, lets replace the word "bug" with
"bad" and move on. It would certainly make third party implementations
of the networking library easier to write without the hashing and
reordering mess, and should make clients more resilient to future
changes in the protocol (where adding a single field won't reorder the
entire template). If something like alphabetical ordering was used it
would significantly change the protocol ordering one time, but this
probably isn't much different than a normal protocol-breaking release.
More information about the SLDev