Re: [mmox] More LLIDL questions

[Mark Lentczner <[e-mail]>]

On Feb 19, 2009, at 5:56 PM, Hurliman, John wrote:
> Last question. I found this snippet of LLIDL from the agent login  
> draft proposal on the Second Life wiki:
Gosh, I hope this won't be the *last* question! I'm really glad you  
are diving into this draft to this level of detail!

> agents: [ first_name: string, last_name: string ... ]

This was valid in an earlier, internal form of LLIDL. The intent was,  
as Meadhbh said, was to describe an array of values, grouped in twos.  
As you pointed out, the current valid way to do this is:

	agents: [ string, string, ... ]

The intent of the member-like names was so that the specification  
could name the members of the grouping, not that those members-like  
names appeared in the LLSD in any way. The confusion that ensued from  
that design seemed more than the utility it provided, so we removed it  
at a later stage. I think this discussion proves the point!

In any event, this kind of construction probably shouldn't be  
encouraged in APIs. Your alternative structure is far preferable from  
the standpoint of extensibility and understanding:

> agents: [ { first_name: string, last_name: string } ... ]

	- Mark


Mark Lentczner
Sr. Systems Architect
Technology Integration
Linden Lab

[e-mail]

Zero Linden
[e-mail]