I am not suggesting no names, AM should allocate system generated names and they will then show up. It should even log it.
Thks Amol On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Sanjay Pujare <[email protected]> wrote: > That’s a good point. System generated names can still be made to work for > this use-case but I see the reason for having a name. > > But then another set of questions come up: we need to validate the name > for uniqueness within an app, valid syntax etc. May be it’s already being > done. > > On 8/4/16, 10:36 AM, "Munagala Ramanath" <[email protected]> wrote: > > It will not be possible to configure such operators from an XML file > other > than through > wildcards -- but maybe that's OK. > > Ram > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Sanjay Pujare <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > I differ. For the UI to render a DAG the names are useful, but if > the name > > is not required by the engine i.e. the engine is able to execute your > > application fine with empty or null strings as names, is there any > reason > > to make them mandatory? > > > > On the other hand, we can come up with a scheme for system generated > names > > when the caller doesn’t provide a name. I have some ideas. > > > > > > On 8/4/16, 9:48 AM, "Munagala Ramanath" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I don't see any reason to allow either. > > > > Ram > > > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Vlad Rozov < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Currently addOperator/addStream/addModule allows both null > and empty > > > string in the operator/stream/module names. Is there any > reason to > > allow > > > empty string? Should empty string and null be disallowed in > those > > APIs? > > > > > > Vlad > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
