[interfacekit] Re: BMessage format

I have documented the FOB1 format (need to clean it up and get it 
commited), and it's actually pretty simple -- especially if you don't 
care about replies.  I will try to get that done tonight.

e

>
>> we just had a discussion about which way to go for kernel BMessages -
>>  
>> as you may know, the R5 kernel sends our BMessages directly to 
>> applications for node monitoring and live query messages.
>> The best alternative idea to avoid code duplication was a special new 

>> BMessage format, i.e. 'FOB0': the kernel would know how to write 
>> them, 
>> the BMessage class would know how to read them. We might even want to 

>> put some helper parse classes in libroot.so, in a way that the C API 
>> could also use them (i.e. for kernel modules).
>> 
>> Have you written any documentation/specs about BMessages yet=3F All I 

>> found is a very basic field description (in docs/develop/app/
>> bmessage.txt).
>> Depending on the message format, I could consider dropping the 
>> special 
>> FOB0 format.
>> 
>> Anyway, what are your thoughts about the FOB0 idea in general=3F
>
>If it is really more compact, then I'm all for it.
>
>CU, Ingo
>
>


Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the 
argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
        -William Pitt, British prime-minister (1759-1806)

Other related posts: