On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 05:05:05PM -0800, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 8:10 AM David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> 
> > I like this proposal. It has no effect on the ProcessBrowser, and is
> > helpful when looking at processes elsewhere.
> >
> > Most processes do not have a name, but all processes respond in a concise
> > and useful way to #name.
> >
> >   Process>>name
> >       ^name ifNil: [ self hash asString forceTo: 5 paddingStartWith: $ ]
> >
> 
> 5 is too short.  The identityHash in Spur has 7 digits of significance and
> hash => scaledIdentityHash => identityHash * 256.  Also asString is lazy;
> it just calls printString. I wouldn't contract at all:
> 
> Process>>name
>       ^name ifNil: [self hash printString]
> 
> 
> > So +1 from me
> >

What I said is that I like Christoph's proposal, that's all.

If we think that we should change the implementation of Process>>name
that's fine too, but let's not it get in the way of merging Christoph's
suggestion into trunk. OK?

Dave