Request for comments: Sorting fields in signature generation
barry at sxip.com
Wed Sep 27 16:55:16 UTC 2006
Johannes, if as you say "many people do this kind of thing in many
circumstances", why limit their ability to do so in this
circumstance? This proposal doesn't _force_ anyone to us multiple
parameters with the same name. I'm in favour of keeping the
specification flexible by not imposing unnecessary restrictions on
future extensions to the protocol.
For that matter, isn't having implementation issues in certain
restrictive development environments drive the specification kind of
like the tail wagging the dog?
On 26-Sep-06, at 4:44 PM, Johannes Ernst wrote:
> On Sep 26, 2006, at 16:13, Josh Hoyt wrote:
>> I think the real topic of this discussion is whether or not multiple
>> parameters with the same name should be allowed by the specification.
> I'd support the motion of not doing that.
> I realize many people do this kind of thing in many circumstances,
> but in my experience, it always turns out to be more trouble than
> it's worth.
More information about the specs