[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
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.