http://bugzilla.ecoinformatics.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5722
Marten Lohstroh <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #13 from Marten Lohstroh <[email protected]> --- If certain strings are unacceptable as labels because the parser cannot deal with them, then the only right behavior for records is to reject such labels (as was established by changeset 64633). The problem is that actors like RecordDisassembler and RecordAssembler use a number of complex type constraints that tie port names to labels in RecordTypes. Bluntly renaming labels results in undesired behavior and unexpected typing problems. Because the the sanitation mapping is not invertible, the original port names can no longer function as proper identifiers. E.g., what kind of record should a RecordAssembler with two inputs "a b" and "a_b" produce? And how can RecordDisassembler ensure that its input record has two distinct fields that correspond two its two outputs "c d" and "c_d"? Errors like these would be trapped by RecordType as it requires labels to be unique, but the resulting errors are not very friendly, and the solution as a whole is not very elegant. If we want to allow record labels that are equally expressive as port names, the expression language needs to be adapted. This is a task that requires some careful thought. I don't have time to look into this right now, but I will look do so by the end of February and come up with a proposal / candidate implementation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
_______________________________________________ Kepler-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/kepler/mailman/listinfo/kepler-dev
