| I had another idea of how to do this. A simple and lightweight approach would be to implement an n_order message which allowed you to specify the ordering of a number of nodes explicitly. This would be more robust than a series of move messages, since it would not depend on the order in which those messages arrived, and would not fail if one of the nodes was already freed (just post a warning and continue with the ordering). This would avoid the need for a lot of clientside bookkeeping about node state, thus keeping things lightweight. The message would also take a target and addAction, with the normal defaults. An object-style Node:reorder method could determine an order using whatever constraints and then send a single n_order message to the server. Thoughts? S. On 29 Jul 2009, at 18:17, Scott Wilson wrote:
|