On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 11:41:59AM -0600, Edgar Friendly wrote:
> Toad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > Make sure it's reasonably easy to extend it... there will only be a few
> > possible fields on a given message, but there may be new messages etc.
> 
> So far we have less than 50 messages (I think it's around 25 or so,
> but I'll estimate high to prove my point).  I'm allocating a whole

How many fields do we have?

> byte for messages, so we have 5* expansion potential with using only
> single-byte encodings.  And of course we can always do the UTF thing
> and use multi-byte encodings if we need to.  But I realy doubt we'll
> come up with 200 more messages.
> 
> The fields part will be handled such that unknown fields (to the
> compression function) just get high-bitted, and sent through as they
> are.  This way arbitrary fieldsets can still be transmitted, but the
> fields we use commonly are still sent efficiently.
> 
> Thelema
> -- 
> E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]                            Raabu and Piisu
> GPG 1024D/36352AAB fpr:756D F615 B4F3 BFFC 02C7  84B7 D8D7 6ECE 3635 2AAB

-- 
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to