Leaderboard

Happy to collect in reputation points instead No, seriously I just woke up got out of bed and its like Christmas. Unfortunately I have to finish off building my deck (another story) so I can't play with this right now and it going to KILL ME Thank you so much AQ - you rock!

Your concerns about having multiple classes with the same GUID are legitimate. Daklu's suggestion of throwing an error in such a case and adding an explicit "rename and preserve history" option sound reasonable. This will mean that people who copy and rename the file outside of LV will get an error. Assuming you got grades which were less than A in your CS courses, did you defend the work under the shield of the poetic license argument? Also, personally, I'm more of a code cartoonist than a code poet, and as such, should be exempt from such stringent requirements.

This was precisely the reason I brought up this point yesterday - people are not aware of this issue and it's very easy to get bitten. The problem is that this declaration is done by name. There are legitimate reasons for wanting to change a class name without wanting to lose the history, so it would have been nicer if this was some sort of GUID and we would get the option to reset this GUID when renaming the class. Here are some examples for legitimate reasons: Code distribution (Daklu's case). Spelling mistakes (Oh, I forgot to type the F in "shift"?). Changes in the class subject (I first encountered this issue when The Device was nearing the end of the development and marketing gave it its final production name. "OK, I'll just rename the class", thought I). I would really like to avoid this. The class name is supposed to be descriptive and having different names will just create confusion (see case 3 above). For further reading, you may wish to have a look at the preserving class data document: http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/6316