Hi All,
one thing people may be missing here is that identity hashes are not unique. Just because two objects have the same identity hash does not imply they are the same object. In V3 the identityHash field is 11 bits and identity hash’s range from 0 to 2,047. In Spur the identityHash field is 22 bits and identity hash’s range from 1 to 4,194,303. With the 64-bit system one can easily create 4 million instances of some class and in doing so create two distinct objects with the same identityHash. Including the identityHash in basic print strings, at least for me, carries a false implication that the identityHash uniquely identifies an object. It does not.
_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
On Feb 16, 2021, at 3:58 AM, Marcel Taeumel marcel.taeumel@hpi.de wrote:
Hmm... this change would certainly be in line with what "Morph new printString" looks like. :-) I recall a not-too-distant discussion about adding the hash to any object's printOn:.
http://forum.world.st/Object-gt-gt-printOn-refined-td5117573.html
Best, Marcel
Am 16.02.2021 07:25:32 schrieb Tobias Pape das.linux@gmx.de:
Hi
On 16. Feb 2021, at 00:39, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 05:01:37PM -0600, Chris Muller wrote:
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 11:00 AM Eliot Miranda wrote:
I disagree with this. Only certain processes are named. Including the destiny name of unnamed processes just introduces noise. By all means include the name of named processes, but please *don???t* add verbosity where it is unhelpful.
+1. You are so right. Assigning a *name* for human consumption establishes the intent of the human's desire to utilize its #name as the basis for its consumption. If specific identity distinction is needed, then set it as part of its name, but we should not include arbitrary attributes in its #printString. If such additional identity attributes are needed, they should be consumed by sending the appropriate messages from the appropriate places (UI).
Eliot and Chris both think that this was a bad idea. I don't understand the objection, but if no one speaks up in support of it, I will revert the merge in a day or two.
I'd like to retain the synthetic name. It certainly helps people like me who read and write with a voice in their head.
Best -Tobias