<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>And, to nit-pick even more; it's NOT an UUID, it's a GUID. But that's kind of taken, so the pragmatic approach mould be UUID.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, we own the namespace, let's call it an UUID. :D<BR>
<BR>
By the way, why we want to get away from LLUUID is because large parts of the codebase includes libsecondlife ONLY to get that datatype.<BR>
<BR>
depending on libsecondlife for something as central as ID handling leads to those assemblies being cumbersome to re-use in other settings (like, for example, when building web apps, standalone tools and supporting services - take the case of the UGAI; they really shouldn't need libsecondlife at all.)<BR>
<BR>
/Stefan<BR>
<BR><BR> <BR>
<HR id=stopSpelling>
<BR>
> From: sempuki1@gmail.com<BR>> To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de<BR>> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:18:21 +0900<BR>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Thoughts on UUID<BR>> <BR>> Nit-pick: how about OpenSim.UUID or OpenSim.UniqueID; in a namespace?<BR>> <BR>> Its a pet peeve of mine when people prefix things that should be<BR>> namespaced. ;)<BR>> <BR>> Cheers,<BR>> <BR>> On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 14:14 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:<BR>> > One of the things that I ran into today is how many places LLUUID ends<BR>> > up in our code base from libsecondlife. While not always a problem it<BR>> > does lead to some oddness.<BR>> > <BR>> > * libsecondlife is a required link for lots of classes that just need a<BR>> > UUID<BR>> > * LLUUID is not serializable, which causes us some pain<BR>> > * LLUUID has changed a couple of times in the past, causing us grief<BR>> > <BR>> > It seems like it would be a good idea to replace LLUUID as much as<BR>> > possible with our own OSUUID (I put a sample in<BR>> > OpenSim/Framework/OSUUID.cs). It would look very similar to LLUUID<BR>> > (which is basically just a wrapper on System.Guid), but be<BR>> > [Serializable]. It would also mean that we could drop a lot of<BR>> > libsecondlife references. I think that would be required for Stefan's<BR>> > OpenSim.Model idea.<BR>> > <BR>> > Thoughts?<BR>> > <BR>> > This will be a lot of work if we decide to do it, and a couple of days<BR>> > of brutal instability to do a swap out like this, as we can't get rid of<BR>> > LLUUID entirely (we need it when we get to packet generation I think).<BR>> > <BR>> > Discussion on this one would be appreciated. Definitely wouldn't want<BR>> > to make any changes like this without full agreement from everyone.<BR>> > <BR>> > -Sean<BR>> > <BR>> > _______________________________________________<BR>> > Opensim-dev mailing list<BR>> > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de<BR>> > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev<BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> Opensim-dev mailing list<BR>> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de<BR>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev<BR><BR></body>
</html>