A while back there was discussion about how RIFE could support both
"int" and "long" for IDs of database objects.
A thought just occurred to me: if supporting both is difficult, why
support "int" at all? If a smaller value is needed in the database table
(for space reasons, etc.), it can be specified using a maxValue()
constraint on the ID field, or maybe some other new constraint.
If IDs had been "long" from the get-go, I seriously doubt you'd have
seen a single request from someone who wanted *fewer* possible primary
key values. I don't really see any significant downside to using "long"
for all identifiers.
Well, there's one downside to *switching* to "long": obviously it would
be a non-backward-compatible change. However, I suspect it'd be a change
that would not take people much time to cope with. And it would
certainly lead to less confusion than any solution I've seen discussed
for supporting both key types at the same time.
-Steve
_______________________________________________
Rife-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.uwyn.com/mailman/listinfo/rife-users
