I think I'd argue for keeping this stuff in the session, but maybe providing
a way to specify different session back-ends, or maybe for specifying a
different back-end for different namespaces. I also wonder how the
hasMessages() and similar state reporting methods should work with multiple
-- townxelliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
(on Tuesday, 17 July 2007, 08:11 AM -0700):
I think I'd argue for keeping this stuff in the session, but maybe providing
a way to specify different session back-ends, or maybe for specifying a
different back-end for different namespaces.
That's a debate
I'm not sure how FlashMessenger is supposed to work, as there are several
places where a $namespace option is supposed to be accepted by a function,
but it's not part of the parameters. Also, adding namespaces adds complexity
when using hasMessages(), count() etc., which currently only return
-- townxelliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
(on Monday, 16 July 2007, 09:03 AM -0700):
I'm not sure how FlashMessenger is supposed to work, as there are several
places where a $namespace option is supposed to be accepted by a function,
but it's not part of the parameters. Also, adding namespaces
way to rain on my parade
On 7/16/07, Matthew Weier O'Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-- townxelliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
(on Monday, 16 July 2007, 09:03 AM -0700):
I'm not sure how FlashMessenger is supposed to work, as there are several
places where a $namespace option is supposed to be
-- Eric Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
(on Monday, 16 July 2007, 12:52 PM -0400):
way to rain on my parade
I think the issue is valid; the question is how to approach it. Ralph
brings up a good argument: some of the use cases indicate that a more
generic, intra-action messaging system should
