Re: identifying module types

[Tristan Gingold]

On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 11:54:41PM +0100, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 December 2006 21:56, Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-12-09 at 06:31 +0100, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 06:02:31PM -0600, Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 06:09 +0200, Tristan Gingold wrote:
[...]
> I am for making "type"s arbitrary. If one wants to use a "type" as an UUID, 
> she can. If one wants to use a "type" as a symbolic name, she can. I think it 
> is the most flexible and simplest way to make the interpretation of "type"s 
> up to the user.
I am not against this proposal.  I just could object we'd better to have
a mechanism to avoid collision.  If the "type" is a string collisions would
appear really soon.

Tristan.