you observed such an effect? External symbol
names are absolutely constant, there is no way to change them, as the
name _is_ the symbol's address in the DB.
Are you sure you did not accidentally create new objects?
Cheers,
- Alex
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 01:10:19PM +0200, Henrik Sarvell wrote:
This is good news because then the external symbol can be used to access an
object, rendering an explicit autoincrementing id redundant in many
situations.
Yes, especially if you use 'id' to convert the name to/from a number.
This
I don't know if this has been asked before but I don't think so.
I've gotten the impression that ext names can not be relied upon to always
be the same for any given object, but what kind of operations will cause
them to change?
Hi Henrik,
I've gotten the impression that ext names can not be relied upon to always
be the same for any given object, but what kind of operations will cause
them to change?
Can you describe where you observed such an effect? External symbol
names are absolutely constant, there is no way
