On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:59 AM, Juan Pablo Ugarte
<juanpablouga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello guys
>
> Question for Tristan and Marco
>
> Is there any specific reason why we should keep external object in a
> different name space (other table)
> now that this is only for object and not any variable?
They should ideally use the same hash (or namespace, as you put it).
However it calls to question some nastier implications, such as... what
happens when you expose an external object which has the same
name as a declared object... should the external object be used instead ?
(i.e. should it be able to override internally declared fragments ?)
I think at least for now, we want to keep things as simple as possible
so the answer is no, it should not be able to override anything, and
a warning should be issued if there are any collisions in the internal
hash.
Cheers,
-Tristan
>
> greets
>
> Juan Pablo
_______________________________________________
Glade-devel maillist - Glade-devel@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/glade-devel
