Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.tech:293 comp.sys.amiga:17624
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!mordor!sri-spam!ames!pasteur!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!pete
From: pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech,comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: IPC: Messages (again) [+ -- Oopsie.]
Message-ID: <8720@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 14 Apr 88 06:07:35 GMT
References: <7685@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <806@nuchat.UUCP> <7929@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <8250@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <895@nuchat.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: pete@violet.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Pete Goodeve)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 26
Keywords: IPC Message Format


In article <895@nuchat.UUCP> Peter da Silva writes:

> Are you a Goon Show fan, too?
> (I talk to the trees, that's why they put me away)

Well, only a cardboard replica, actually.  (You can't get the wood, y'know...)

>
> > Looks like we're forced into YAFF (Yet Another Bloody Field) in each item
>
> YABF, don't you mean? :->

As a matter of fact it was "Bloody" that was mis-substituted.... (:^))

>
> >      void   *IE_Ptr; /* points to defined data structure
> >               ^      (could be within message block if IE_Flags says so) */
> >      };       |
>                 \_ Shouldn't this column be an 'I' for 'Item' now?

Aye aye cap'n...

So -- do we actually have an agreed message format?  Can we start using it?
Can we persuade anyone else to start using it?

                                        -- Pete --