On 11/10/2011 01:19 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 10/11/11 19:06, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 11/10/2011 10:59 AM, Zane Bitter wrote:
>> On 10/11/11 16:40, Russell Bryant wrote:
>>> We have some options, it's just not as pretty. We could add new APIs
>>> that return results in a different way. We could add another parameter
>>> that requests that results be provided in a different way. It's safe to
>>> call a QMF method without an argument, as long as the agent is written
>>> not to expect it.
>>
>> Shouldn't it be equally safe to return extra output arguments?
>
> Hmm ... good question. In C++, yes. What about the other language
> bindings? What do the results look like in Python, for example? Do you
> just get a dict that may have new stuff in it?
Yes.
So you could have the current thing returning OK/FAIL + data as it does
now, and also separate extra output arguments for the return code and
just the data.
Ok, so that works. Do you happen to know what message size limits we
might hit? The data portion could potentially be fairly verbose, and
we're talking about including that data twice.
--
Russell Bryant