On 21 Sep 2017, at 9:10, Siwek, Jon wrote:
>> On Sep 21, 2017, at 10:37 AM, Johanna Amann <joha...@corelight.com> >> wrote: >> >> The only thing that I would like to avoid (which is obviously >> separate >> from this) is internally remapping variable names to configuration >> names >> in a non-reversible manner; then one suddenly has to think about what >> to >> do when names conflict (several variable names being able to >> automatically >> map to the same configuration name). But - that seem to be separate >> concern :) > > Still not sure how much of an issue that is, provided the display > names are only for display and not used to actually locate/update > identifier values. E.g. if a user sees 2 “User Name” fields in a > UI, I think we’re still able to fall back on the broxygen > documentation comments to provide more context to the user. Or if > theres standardized/automatic conventions for these display names that > are based on modules/namespacing, I’m not sure how often you’d > even see such conflicts, or ’d expect they’d get patched out > pretty rapidly by the community when they pop up. This actually was my point - which I apparently did not make clear. As long as it is only for display it is not a problem - I just don't want it to be used for identification :) Johanna _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list bro-dev@bro.org http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
