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

re: Multilines necessary?

On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Dave Kormann wrote:
> multilines are a requirement (i think they pretty much HAVE to be)

Why is that?  Jupiter got along just fine without any multiline messages 
at all.

I think the problem here is that MCP is confusing two separate issues: 
multiplexing and type-encoding.  Multiplexing is not necessary to encode 
newline escape sequences, and in fact is not always the most efficient 
way of doing so.  I think that this confusion is also why there was
so much discussion about what (if any!) difference there is between a 
single-line message and a multi-line message consisting of a single 
line.  The assumption seems to be that multiplexing is the only 
(or best) way to encode lists of strings.  And while we're at it, what about 
lists of lists of strings?  What about hashtables or associated lists or 
other more complicated data types (which MOO lacks and has to simulate 
with lists of lists, but clients may have "native" representations)?

But I'm raising these questions more as Things to Consider than as 
proposed changes to MCP.  I think Dave (Van Buren) and I joined the 
discussion after the time for debating these sorts of fundamental issues 
had passed. You might as well just formalize what you've got and be 
done with it.