GUIDs are COMish

Topics: CAB & Smart Client Software Factory
Jul 8, 2005 at 4:10 AM
originally posted by: idlsoft2

Aren't they?
They do identify things but at the cost of configs and everything else mentioning them being unreadable/unwritable.
Eclipse never introduced them, it relies on namespaces and that seems to work just fine, so is it really worth it?
Jul 9, 2005 at 9:01 AM
originally posted by: EdJez

Yes they are COMish - I personally dislike them deeply to identify classes of things. However, to uniquely identify instances is a different issue.

I think the only places we use guids are:

- inside component model, when dealing with COM services thru interop (understandably COMish)
- to identify workitem instances uniquely (however you don't get exposed to this unless you choose to, if you want to traverse workitems you would use well chosen names)
- in the state persistence, when we save the aforementioned workitem instance id

which one of these stirred your COM memories? what would you suggest?
Jul 9, 2005 at 8:14 PM
originally posted by: idlsoft2

The usage of class Guid did :) Or is it a struct? It was an immediate reaction, didn't even give me time to realize that it's about instances. Sorry.
I myself try to avoid them whenever possible and if we're talking about instances something like the querystring of an url comes to mind. The page being the type and the querystring identifying the instance. Not an easily acceptable analogy and one that requires some explicit coding but that probably would be my first instinct.