SAMP v1.0 WD published
aa at astro.ex.ac.uk
Mon Jul 7 15:52:49 PDT 2008
Mark Taylor wrote:
> Alasdair Allan wrote:
>> ...can you tell me what's intended here? Previously this wasn't a
>> constrain in the specification. Is this an oversight, an
>> unintended consequence, or did you actually mean to do this?
> it's an unintended, but not unforseen, consequence. I agree that
> it is a constraint in that it means the hub re-uses message IDs. I
> believe that it's harmless; it doesn't lead to unavoidable
> confusion, since any later reference to the message ID will also
> have access to the identity of the recipient, so can identify which
> of the sends with the same msg-id is being talked about.
> Can you think of any particular use cases in which this behaviour
> would cause problems?
Not off the top of my head, but architecturally the idea sort of
doesn't feel right to me. Not sure I can come up with a valid reason
for this one, but it just feels wrong.
More information about the apps-samp