[development] need a standard for contrib node build_mode constants

[Jeff Eaton]

Indeed.

At least with strings it's possible to develop meaningful conventions.  
With ints, there is literally no meaning other than "first come, first  
served, set up a registry."

--Jeff


On May 19, 2009, at 1:57 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote:

> Quoting Jeff Eaton <jeff at viapositiva.net>:
>
>> The problem is not one of information storage length, but of flag  
>> collision.
>>
>> Ints are fine as primary keys on a lookup table, or constant values  
>> for internal flags that will never be extensible. For things we  
>> know people will build on -- like node types, or node build modes  
>> -- strings are the only way to avoid collisions when module  
>> developers start expanding.
>>
>
> The only way to avoid a collision between developers of modules is  
> to create a namespace based on the module name for whatever the data  
> is.  So for node_type a unique key of module and name creates the  
> necessary uniqueness required.  The system though needs to include  
> the module for the content type in it's presentation so that one  
> knows by looking at the UI which module the content type is for.   
> Perhaps the use of fieldsets where the fieldset is the module name  
> could help clear up the confusion when more than one module could  
> create a UI data conflict.