[TINDER-64] Investigate why Presence.Type and Presence.Show enums are not in RFC defined order Created: 15/Jun/11  Updated: 28/Oct/20  Resolved: 18/Jun/11

Status: Resolved
Project: Tinder
Components: None
Affects versions: 1.2.2.
Fix versions: None

Type: Task Priority: Minor
Reporter: wroot Assignee: Guus der Kinderen
Resolution: Fixed Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original estimate: Not Specified

Ignite Forum URL: http://community.igniterealtime.org/message/213555#213555

 Description   

Out of interest, I wonder why the Presence.Type and Presence.Show enums in Tinder are not in the same defined order as the RFC6121 http://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6121.html#presence-syntax-type I wonder, because I an integrating with an external app that has defined a C enum with available = 0, error = 1, 2 = probe etc, which seemed a logical way to do it.



 Comments   
Comment by Guus der Kinderen [ 18/Jun/11 ]

I believe that the current order of these Java enumeration is defined by chance. If anything, it should follow the XSD definition as provided in http://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6120.html#schemas-client - although changing that now could potentially break some implementations. As in Java we don't need to refer to the ordinal of an element in an enumeration anyway, I'd opt to leave things as-is in Tinder.

Generated at Fri Mar 29 13:18:03 UTC 2024 using Jira 1001.0.0-SNAPSHOT#100248-rev:6a03a54452e975225e04dfda06fdac6fd9e95b00.