--On Thursday, February 10, 2011 03:29:04 PM -0600 Andrew Deason
<[email protected]> wrote:
Doing something like this allows for space-optimization in what is the
most common case for us
Premature optimization is the root of all evil.
Are you sure that the savings of a few bytes in, say,
VL_GetAddrsNewAndShiny is worth the extra complexity?
How about a new type of union that always sends the length of the
encoded data?
This would make things easier in many other situations as well, so I'm
all for it. Would that mean we're diverging from regular XDR, though?
It would, but then, that's not new. I proposed a new _primitive_ type
several days ago, though someone (you?) has since described a way to do
what we were talking about in terms of an opaque<>.
(Does it matter?)
No, I don't think it does. AFS already has a primitive UUID type not
included in other XDR variants.
-- Jeff
_______________________________________________
AFS3-standardization mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
