On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:00:51 +0100 Dave wrote: DS> On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 15:44, Robert Story wrote: DS> > However, it leaves me wondering why we shouldn't just merge the two. DS> > When would one ever use the instance handler? DS> DS> a) I dunno, ask Wes. That's one of his
Ok. Wes? DS> b) If (for some unexplained reason) you wanted DS> to implement a table one element at a time. I assume that was sarcasm? At any rate, it doesn't sound like enough of a reason to justify the confusion. DS> In general, I'd tend to agree - I don't believe that the instance DS> handler is particularly useful. (And the relevant discussion DS> in That Bloody Book would leave the reader in no doubt of my DS> opinions here!) DS> But this is one of Wes' helpers, so I'm reluctant to simply DS> drop it. Particularly since it's probably more widely used DS> than the (superior, IMO) scalar handler. Don't worry, this brash American is perfectly willing to go toe-to-toe with Wes. ;-) I'd definitely vote for updating all code and conf files to use the more correct scalar helper and make the instance helper a simple wrapper around the scalar one, with a deprecated warning (as you suggested for table_data). -- Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie Support: <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. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tell us your software development plans! Take this survey and enter to win a one-year sub to SourceForge.net Plus IDC's 2005 look-ahead and a copy of this survey Click here to start! http://www.idcswdc.com/cgi-bin/survey?id=105hix _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
