Judson Valeski wrote: > Conrad Carlen wrote: > >> 2. The consumer could just explicitly ask for a non-shared location, >> using the %ProcID% method I mentioned. This way, components have to >> specify whether they use shared or non-shared data. I think that >> localizes the control over what's shared to the component which uses >> the data. Say that we are able to make the cache function with shared >> data. Then we just change what location property *it* uses. > > > I assume "ProcID" would actually be an "AppID" or something. ProcID > implies variability (OS doesn't always give an app the same ProcID for > example).
Yes. "AppID" is a better term for it. Its value would always be constant for a given executable between runs and reboots. > > > The only thing that bugs me about this model is that the component > needs to know what's shared or not. Maybe that's actually a feature. > I'm not sure. My thought was that, as a given component's data was made to be shareable, it would then be able to move from non-shared to shared space. I think that doing this on a component-by-component basis is good because each component best knows, or should be able to control, its sharable status. -Conrad > > > Jud
