On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:15:10 -0700 Wes wrote: WH> >>>>> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 13:39:46 -0400, Robert Story (Coders) WH> DS> - By default, handlers return success/failure, but don't explicitly WH> DS> call the next handler in the chain. [...] WH> WH> Robert> Well, the problem there is that it's not backwards WH> Robert> compatible. [...] WH> WH> It can not be done by default. No way. No how. It would completely WH> trash backwards compatibility for an incredibly negligible gain.
Is that what I just said? (although not in so many words...) ;-) WH> Robert> Be I think making if the default for the version 6 api would WH> Robert> be a good idea. WH> WH> ... even for version 6. You missed a word: 'api'. What I was implying was a new, improved api in version 6. Not changing the existing one. Don't worry, I think we're all pretty clear on how you feel about backwards compatibility. :-P -- Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie <http://www.net-snmp.org/> <irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp> Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=net-snmp-coders> You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
