[PATCH] Second pass (was Re: [PATCH] First pass at finishing the last major feature on the TODO list (RequestName))

[Havoc Pennington]

On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 19:55 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> Second pass at this and it looks like I have worked out most of the
> kinks thanks to the test.  I still haven't implemented the signal
> checking since it is a bit harder being that they are async. Any
> suggestions? Can I rely on the NameAquired, NameLost and
> NameOwnerChanged signals to always come in the same order?  In the code
> it looks that way but is there a chance they can get reordered when
> going over the bus?

You can rely on the order. I don't know if we have the order in the spec
(though we probably should), but they will not get reordered when going
over the bus - for a given connection, you are guaranteed to always get
messages in the same order they were sent.

The only thing to be aware of is that there's no guarantee which
connections will get messages first. i.e. the bus could send 3 messages
to connection A, then 2 to B, then 5 to A, then 4 to C. All the messages
to A are in a fixed order, but it is not defined or reliable how they
are interleaved with the messages to B and C.

Havoc