SAMP v1.0 WD published

[Alasdair Allan]

Mark Taylor wrote:
> Alasdair Allan wrote:
>> ...can you tell me what's intended here? Previously this wasn't a  
>> constrain in the specification. Is this an oversight, an  
>> unintended consequence, or did you actually mean to do this?
>
> it's an unintended, but not unforseen, consequence.  I agree that  
> it is a constraint in that it means the hub re-uses message IDs. I  
> believe that it's harmless; it doesn't lead to unavoidable  
> confusion, since any later reference to the message ID will also  
> have access to the identity of the recipient, so can identify which  
> of the sends with the same msg-id is being talked about.
>
> Can you think of any particular use cases in which this behaviour  
> would cause problems?

Not off the top of my head, but architecturally the idea sort of  
doesn't feel right to me. Not sure I can come up with a valid reason  
for this one, but it just feels wrong.

Oh well...

Al.