Re: [mmox] Representing Number Types [Was: Re: Details proposal]

[Jon Watte <[e-mail]>]

Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity) wrote:
>     - or is it okay for me to say.. "if you connect to Second Life, i 
> will insist that integers are 32 bits." and for OSGrid to say "if you 
> connect to OSGrid, i will insist that integers are 64 bits."

I don't think that's smart, because sometimes an integer value only 
needs to be one byte. In OLIVE we specify integers with a bit-precision 
representation -- a 13-bit int is nothing special to us. Our internal 
IDL compiles to structures that arrange and pad integers based on 
declared size. We don't do integers bigger than 64 bits, though.
I'm prepared to relax this to 'integers are one of the basic types' (8, 
16, 32 or 64 bits, signed or unsigned) for purposes of interoperability, 
but I think that specifying integer ranges in the declaration of 
messages is necessary, or you'll have to treat every integer field as 
possibly being the worst case (64 bits signed).

Sincerely,

jw