> > You gain a lot of flexibility by associating them with a subtype instead > > of the general "int" type. There's important information conveyed by the > > fact that CreationInfo is defined at "Date Time" instead of "int/int/int > > int:int:int"; > > Sure, but you make the code indescribably complex, and make people itchy > to add new types in the future.
No, you'd have generic code that handles the parsing and unstanding of your type file. Adding new types is simply a matter of adding a new entry to that file. > > Using this construct we could even do comparisons across different types > > easily. A message could define a new type based on known types > > dynamically with each message. > As you could do with int representations. Doing it this way makes it more general. You could put in rules for comparisions of generalized types. ie record 1 is older than record 2 if record1's date is > record2's date or record1's date = record2's date and record1's time > record2's time. -larry _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
