On 2012/09/21 21:46, Eric Wollesen <er...@xmtp.net> wrote: > I have observed that if a user sends MPD a noidle message, without > having previously sent an idle message, then MPD does not respond. > > Is this intentional behavior?
Yes, that's exactly how it's documented and how it's designed. > Is there any good reason why the server does not respond with a OK > message, or some sort of ACK if that is more appropriate..? Yes. My psychic powers tell me that you asked the wrong question, you did not want a "yes" or "no" response. I'll just pretend you asked the right question. Imagine: what would happen if MPD would really respond to "noidle"? Example: you send "idle", but then decide you want to leave the mode and send another command. Right in the middle of that, an "idle" response from MPD is approaching. Now what happens? Your client receives the "idle" response, but thinks MPD has already received "noidle" and this is the response to "noidle". It sends the new command, but now receives the response to "noidle". Now your client and MPD are out of sync. Therefore, consistency can only be achieved by never ever responding to "noidle" - because "noidle" is not a command, it's just a magic keyword that makes MPD leave "idle" but will be ignored as a command. Max ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Got visibility? Most devs has no idea what their production app looks like. Find out how fast your code is with AppDynamics Lite. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;262219671;13503038;y? http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html _______________________________________________ Musicpd-dev-team mailing list Musicpd-dev-team@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/musicpd-dev-team
