> That is is a good point. But on the other hand, streaming data will require > changes to the protocol anyways. I think we would probably need a field like > "StreamingData=true" or something for that, and that could override the > absence > of a DataLength field.
But then we're just back to having RawMessage look for a special field. I think it would be better if RawMessage didn't look at DataLength and the messages that use it check for it. RawMessage should just read to the trailing field without looking at what any of the fields are. _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
