[Interop-dev] Multiple Graphs/Routes update

[Henning Rogge]

Yes, look good.

Henning

On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Nemesis <(spam-protected)> wrote:
> On 06/15/2015 06:19 PM, Nemesis wrote:
>> On 06/14/2015 10:40 PM, Henning Rogge wrote:
>>> > On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Nemesis <(spam-protected)> wrote:
>>>>> >> > On 06/14/2015 09:27 PM, Henning Rogge wrote:
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > why not keep it simple and allow all four kinds of NetworkXYZ elements
>>>>> >> > within a collection? Just make it a container with multiple of the
>>>>> >> > other elements inside?
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Henning, that sounds like a good idea.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Let me impersonate the devil's advocate, why do we need NetworkCollection to
>>>>> >> > allow all 4 different objects? What can we do with it? Since we have to
>>>>> >> > motivate our choice, this kind of reasoning is necessary.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > A possible con would be:
>>>>> >> > If I have to develop a parser, knowing that in the collection I can find 4
>>>>> >> > different objects is a different amount of work than 2.
>>> > A parse that does not understand one of the objects could just skip it.
>>> >
>>>>> >> > A possible pro wouldbe:
>>>>> >> > list the devices of a network
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > That's cool, but why mixing? What use case do you see?
>>> > I could see some kind of "node information dump" which just collects everything.
>>> >
>>> > We could extend our collection with a future element without breaking
>>> > old parsers... they would just skip unknown/unused sections.
>> Ok for me.
>>
>> Any other thoughts from the lurkers out there?
>
> Here it is:
> https://github.com/interop-dev/netjson/commit/1918bd1a82980f60b2bafbeaeb9f7c4b4ee7a6af
>
> I consider issue 8 closed:
> https://github.com/interop-dev/netjson/issues/8
>
> _______________________________________________
> Interop-dev mailing list
> (spam-protected)
> https://lists.funkfeuer.at/mailman/listinfo/interop-dev