On Sat, 13 Mar 2010, Chris Travers wrote: > On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 10:46 AM, John Locke <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ok this might be a dumb noob question, but why use some hexadecimal >> notation of the module? Why not just the string module name? > > I was thinking about having a much more compact error notation. Maybe > the namespace it is called from would be a good thing to use instead > though.
I actually think the hex idea is the right one, provided that the display code can look it up and append the user-comprehensible module name. My thinking is that you could conceivably run into a circumstance where the module name is ambiguous, whereas a module ID of some kind would be unique. Also, in bug reporting, if you have several potential modules with one name, it might be useful to differentiate. > As for the error ID, I am wondering if it might be better to use a > short string as well. That way we could use SQL State codes as error > id's as well. Seems reasonable. Luke ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Ledger-smb-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel
