[AFS3-std] Re: AFS-3 XDR discriminated union primitive type I-D

[Matt W. Benjamin]

I had thought of safe-union and guarded-union, I wasn't in love with these.

Matt

----- "Andrew Deason" <adeason@sinenomine.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:28:52 -0400
> Tom Keiser <tkeiser@sinenomine.net> wrote:
> 
> > Additionally, IMHO, this is merely a coupling at the namespace
> level:
> > nothing precludes us from adding rx-union XDR routines to any
> > arbitrary RPC framework.
> 
> Yes, just call it something else. I can come up with a bunch of
> suggestions (and I think there have been several on list), but it
> helps
> to have one, so: inline-union? A la BulkStatus vs InlineBulkStatus...
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Deason
> adeason@sinenomine.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AFS3-standardization mailing list
> AFS3-standardization@openafs.org
> http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization

-- 

Matt Benjamin

The Linux Box
206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI  48104

http://linuxbox.com

tel. 734-761-4689
fax. 734-769-8938
cel. 734-216-5309