[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: sigh... really, i'm not dead.

Dave Kormann:
> gaaaaaaaaah, yuck.
> i'm really not liking that.
> this sorta makes me reconsider the behavior about accepting messages
> with duplicate keywords.  worse still, we've got:
> #$#say 123345 what*: "" what: "Hats off" _data-tag abc
> #$#* abc what: Hats on
> #$#END abc
> which means you've got to be careful to throw away those additional
> lines.  yuck yuck yuck yuck yuck.  i dunno.  is there widespread
> insistence that this should be legal?

Supposing the #$#say is considered valid, but that the message is
really a single line message with a heap of junk following.  Then you
don't set up a bucket to pour all the incoming '#$#& abc' lines into.
The * and END handlers then just drop any data they recieve on the
floor when there's no bucket waiting to be filled.  It's easy to throw
stuff away in this case.

Or suppose it's invalid. Then you don't set up a bucket to ...

I do not see what advantage is gained by supporting duplicate keywords,
short of humoring clueless 3rd part implementors.  Um, like me I guess...