Hi, Axel Dörfler wrote: >>I've been mulling over how to fix PortLink properly, and there is >>another issue with PortLink as it is. There are occasions where a >>message protocol has been changed on one side and not the other, and >>the client or the server crashes, hangs, or starts using weird data. >>There needs to be some way to reduce the problems with attachments. >>Here's what I propose: scrap PortLink for something else which we >>know >>works: BMessage, Dano-style. It's a massive changeover, but I think >>it >>would also be very much worth it. > > Sure, that would solve lots of the problems. OTOH it's a lot more > expansive, too. BMessages would need to be changed a lot, too, since > they currently can't be merged together for a simple port write. How about a BMessage-type kind of thing that can be grouped? This would solve all(?) our problems. > We own the code, so (apart from bugs), we only really need to care > about backwards compatibility. It would solve this too. bye, Adi.