On 2009-10-12, at 6:43 AM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:

> Hi Scott,
>
> Scott Brooks wrote:
>> I'm working on getting basic_get support done in rabbitmq-c, and  
>> since
>> a basic get can return a get-ok, or get-empty, that breaks some of  
>> the
>> assumptions of amqp_simple_rpc.
>
> Interesting.
>
>> Would you rather see a patch that has amqp_simple_rpc to take an
>> alternate reply?  Or basic_get to duplicate a lot of the
>> amqp_simple_rpc code?
>
> Definitely one that lets amqp_simple_rpc take more than one expected
> response :-)
>
> Once we switch back to the XML from the JSON protocol description
> language, we will be able to autogenerate this expected-response
> information, which will be nice.
>
> How about a pointer to a 0-terminated array of (amqp_method_number_t) 
> s?
> A varargs "list" would be OK too.
>
>> Or if there is some way to get the one request, two possible valid
>> replies part going that I'm missing if you could point me in the  
>> right
>> direction I would appreciate it.
>
> Nope, you're headed in the right direction.
>
> If you're happy discussing this stuff in public, it'd be great if we
> could move over to the rabbitmq-discuss list.
>
> Regards,
>  Tony
> -- 
> [][][] Tony Garnock-Jones     | Mob: +44 (0)7905 974 211
>   [][] LShift Ltd             | Tel: +44 (0)20 7729 7060
> []  [] http://www.lshift.net/ | Email: tonyg@lshift.net