Ugly ID memories

[DunbarX at aol.com]

In a message dated 12/9/08 3:08:11 PM, mwieder at ahsoftware.net writes:


> To add to what Bjornke posted, if I delete a button and then want to
> recreate it (as in a version control storage and retrieval system),
> then there is *no way* to reuse its previous id in that stack. The id
> number is lost to history. The only workaround for this is too ugly to
> discuss in mixed company.
> 
There was a corollary debate in HC years back; whether the id should be a 
settable property. It was decided (very) on high that it would not be. The 
reasons are lost in time, but I recall it was felt that id's were not intended to be 
indexed, and that as permanent and unique as they were, id's also needed to 
die off completely if the object was deleted. A tribute, in fact, to their very 
uniqueness. In no way linkable, by design, to any remaining or future 
objects.

And I would love to talk about a workaround. Perhaps remember the old id, 
linking it via a look-up table to some other object? But as before, nobody could 
think of a good reason to do so, that is, there was no value in knowing that a 
deleted id was either linked to or owned by any other object. Numbers were 
cheap back in those days, and the simple fact that every object had a unique one 
was considered more than sufficient.


**************
Make your life easier with 
all your friends, email, and favorite sites in one place.  Try it now. 
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)