[liblo] lo_address_set_flags

Talking about lo_address_set_flags, I have a couple of questions ...

It seems lo_address_set_flags is not public, is it intentional?

Also, the flags type for lo_address_set_flags is named lo_proto_flags, shouldn't we rather name it lo_address_flags?

Finally, it would be nice to provide a name for the uninitialized flag, for example LO_NOFLAG=0x00.

Steve, let me know your thoughts and I will add similar option flags for lo_server.

Cam


On 25 mars 2013, at 21:55, Stephen Sinclair <rad...@gm...> wrote:

> I'm not really against an API addition to turn off coercion.  I've
> already added a set of option flags for lo_address, something similar
> for lo_server might make sense.