> Other ideas I'm having for solving the overall problem are:
>
> (1) 'a' and 'b' need to actually be distinct BroType's. Instead of
> 'b' being a reference/alias to 'a' with extended attributes, just
> create it as it's own BroType by first cloning 'a', then adding any
> additional attributes.
I originally went down this route, but this involves adding attributes to
all types, since currently types don't have attributes. Seems like a poor
fit given there's only one class of type (named ones) that need this.
> (2) BroType could somehow store a mapping of identifier -> attributes
> so that on declaring a variable of either 'a' or 'b', we can choose
> which attributes apply.
That seems more hacky than (1), as it involves adding still more to
types-in-general.
Seems simplest to me to have TypeType's (and only those) include attributes.
The rest of it is easy to do from there. We could also do this with a
separate NameType, but I don't see what that gains, since TypeType's already
come into existence because of binding names to types.
Vern
_______________________________________________
bro-dev mailing list
bro-dev@bro.org
http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
