> Yes, this is the dirty way of doing it. By the way I have added an
> enhancement request for this 
> issue:http://code.google.com/p/smslib/issues/detail?id=202

I see, now I noticed this comment. Nice, I will appreciate this if can
minimize the background overhead on special use-cases. After exploring
a source code could same rule be applied to AGateway.QueueManager
inner class task?
* AGateway.QueueManager: if understood properly it sends queued
outgoing messages, but its no use if user app send&read messages
without callbacks.
* ModemGateway.getQueueSchedulingInterval: hardcoded 5sec queuemanager
interval

If I (or anyone else) don't need an asyncronous sending or call
service.queueMessage(msg) method its no use. A simple failsafe would
do fine, call sendMessage if user accidentally called queueMessage but
a task was disabled. Do you think its a safe?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"SMSLib User Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/SMSLib?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to