Re: RFA: Document conventions for terminating query/set packet names

[Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 12:25:44PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>> On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 10:24:22AM -0700, Jim Blandy wrote:
>> > All right.  I think one of my subconscious motivations was that I
>> > didn't like breaking a new feature for an older, deprecated feature. 
>> > But this isn't about "fairness" to features; it's about gettings
>> > things working without breaking too much stuff.  So I'll go along with
>> > retiring the qL and qP prefixes.
>> 
>> Thanks.  Aside from Eli's question I'm fine with this.
>> 
>> I'm wondering if we should mark the qC prefix "bad" too.  I realize
>> there's already qCRC: and I'm not suggesting we rename that.  But of
>> the two other stubs I checked today, both supported qC and neither
>> checked that the C was at the end of the packet.
>> 
>> Amusingly enough, one of them also supported qCRC:, and had a hack to
>> check for that first.
>
> Jim, did you have any opinion on this?  Otherwise, here's a proposed
> patch.  It recommends not starting new packets with qC, and clarifies
> that stubs should check for the end of a packet even for packets
> without a separator.

No --- it looks good.