Add typed data to protocol

[peter-devoil]

resolves #8771

[hol430]

For some reason, I seem to have write access to this repository (or perhaps there are no branch protection rules in place?).

Nice - although midly alarming - to see that people are still using this. Did anyone end up finding a way to guarantee that simulations correctly reset/reinitialise their state at end-of-simulation? Without such a guarantee, this method of running simulations was always rather academic, and their outputs should be treated with a large grain of salt (even moreso than usual!).

[hol353]

There aren't any branch protection rules in place, nor any auto testing.

Did anyone end up finding a way to guarantee that simulations correctly reset/reinitialise their state at end-of-simulation?

No, unfortunately.

[d11638104]

For some reason, I seem to have write access to this repository (or perhaps there are no branch protection rules in place?).

Nice - although midly alarming - to see that people are still using this. Did anyone end up finding a way to guarantee that simulations correctly reset/reinitialise their state at end-of-simulation? Without such a guarantee, this method of running simulations was always rather academic, and their outputs should be treated with a large grain of salt (even moreso than usual!).

Your insight has been truly inspiring. However, if I were to opt out of using it, are there alternative options available? Your guidance would be greatly appreciated.

[d11638104]

Thank you for your gracious response. I conducted a simple test, and it appears to have produced the desired outcome. I also noticed that the earlier client code did indeed lack the "type" field. Once again, thank you for your amendments. Much appreciated!