Re: 10 Char object names was...

[Bruce Vining <bvining@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

If the system comes out with enhancements and customers decide that they like the enhancements and want to utilize the enhancements, then third party software providers would be driven to adjust to the new function if they want to keep their customers happy.  How is this different from any other enhancement to the system?  When database provided support for timestamps and users elected to use timestamps in their applications did this mean the third parties were broken?
   
  I would, by the way, expect that longer names would really be more of a side benefit of something much, much bigger... One of those "as long as we're in there anyway, and people have been asking for a bigger name space...".
   
  Just theorizing though.
   
  Bruce Vining
  http://www.brucevining.com/
  Programming done right

James Lampert <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Kurt Anderson wrote:
> I thought that at Devcon, last November, I heard Mike Smith say,
> during his keynote speech, that 10+ character object names were on
> their list of things they're looking to do. Maybe I misheard?

Bruce Vining wrote:
> I wasn't there so I can't say what Mike may or may not have said,
> but "You heard correctly" would be my guidance :-) A decidedly
> non-trivial, but quite do-able, effort.


Hmm. And it would likely break a whole bunch of third-party software, 
forcing third-party developers to expend a whole lot of non-trivial effort.

Of course, if it were MicroSloth, that in itself would be a reason to 
proceed, particularly if the third-party software in question competed 
with one of their products.