On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 07:46 -0500, Fred Gleason wrote:
Howdy Folks:
I'm in the midst of laying out an OSC namespace for a new app, and have come
across a couple of places where it might make sense to 'overload' different
argument parameters onto the same command node (in the same sense that
different argument lists can be overloaded into identically-named methods in
C++).
An example may help make it clear. Consider the following OSC path:
/daw/cursor/set_position
This would be a command to set a cursor position. If the supplied argument
were a float32, the unit would be assumed to be seconds. If it were a
string, a broken-down time representation ("HH:MM:SS") would be assumed, and
so on.
While I can find nothing in the OSC spec that would specifically forbid this
sort of behavior, I'd like to be sure that, as a practical matter, the
'real-world' apps that are already out there would be able to deal with this
sort of construct. Would anyone be aware of reasons why this sort of layout
would not be a good idea?
I use it. Think it's a good idea in general, as long as you're not
actively stupid about it (i.e. what swh said).
Certainly beeats set_position_float, set_position_time_string, ....
Though, for absolute time you should probably use the OSC timestamp type
(maybe with a different epoch, but that's just semantics)
-DR-