> > This makes it really hard to write nice code. > > I don't think I would have done it if it was "really" hard. But I understand > in your > code it might be difficult for some reason.
It is not 'really' hard (but a bit 'ugly') > > I wonder why it does not simply use the ‘opaque’ field of > > VDAgentMessage instead? > > > > I have No idea what this opaque is for, but I prefer the information to be > explicit. I just read this: http://spice-space.org/page/Whiteboard/AgentProtocol According to that, this field is exactly for that use case. > What if you consider it as a different message with a different structure > somehow? Why don't you simply always include those bytes instead? _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
