>  (if we start to _hack_ the code in such order, then we doesn't need 
> And now to these '-1' values. At first it's inconsistent to 
> have -1 values 
> only for sms values. If we want to have '-1' == UNDEF then 
> _all_ message 
> types should use it and not only sms and I do not see any 
> goal to have these? 

Agreed. It should be either 0 or -1 for all Msgs.

> am I wrong? then please explain why -1 should be better as 0 (zero)?
> Only one thing I can see is: sendsms interface can use sms 
> values (e.g. 
> mclass) as is (0-3).
> 
> So (imo) we have 2 options:
>       1) make all message types consistent, means using -1 as 
> UNDEF values
>       2) get rid of -1 UNDEF values for sms message type.
> 
> 
> Comments and votes please....

-1 unless there is a *very* good reason.



Reply via email to