On Jul 30, 2007, at 2:08 , Alex Stapleton wrote:
I quite like the idea of being able to specify the default value, however I am yet to actually think of a use for it myself :)
I couldn't think of a case for counters where I wouldn't need them to be initialized at some point. I implemented both cases just in case someone does want their initialization and usage separate. As the counter isn't persisted anywhere, hopefully nobody's doing anything mission-critical with it.
Is the default value changed by the amount if the key does not yet exist?
I don't think that's very intuitive, but that's a bit subjective. It made sense to me to set and return the default value when the key doesn't exist.
What happens at integer wrap around? (What happens at the moment as well?) Are we clamping or just letting it overflow?
The current protocol doc says that underflow is detected, but overflow isn't. I assume that means it'd wrap. We could also define it to fault or jump to the (specified) default again.
-- Dustin Sallings
