Re: Data pointer with TLM_IGNORE_COMMAND

I vote yes, too.

Regards,
Kaz Yoshinaga

From: john.aynsley@doulos.com
Subject: Data pointer with TLM_IGNORE_COMMAND
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 18:45:53 +0000

> All,
>
> Personally, I accept Jerome's argument that allowing the GP data pointer to be null when the command is TLM_IGNORE_COMMAND would make more sense and would not cause any serious backward compatibility problems. A similar relaxation of the rules would apply to the GP data length attribute: we would allow it to be 0.  (Jerome has already given a detailed analysis on the reflector, which I will not repeat here.)
>
> Do people agree? Votes please.
>
> Thanks,
>
> John A
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.