27 Mar
2005
27 Mar
'05
6:32 p.m.
On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 09:39:31AM -0800, Matt Wright wrote:
When we wrote that part of the OSC Spec, we were
thinking
of the case in which an OSC Method doesn't need to know
the address through which it was invoked, i.e., "usual"
cases like setting a parameter. That's why the spec
doesn't mention sending either the expanded or unexpanded
OSC address to a handler --- sorry about that.
Why not simply always send both? That seems more general
and easier to understand than a special case, at least for
me.
Well, that would require changing the API, which is a Bad Thing, and there
is a user_data parameter than can encode that kind of contextual
information when its needed. Also, the method callback functions are too
complicated allready :)
- Steve