The UUIDGenerator has unnecessarily heavy-handed implementation, however it does adhere to the RFC specs as far as I could tell.
Which also means that it's definitely usable across images and platforms. If anything, the weak point would be the random number generator, not UUID. And at least on unix/linux it uses /dev/urandom so it should be pretty reliable. So ask yourself what's the probability of your PRNGs generating same 122 bits. This thread might also interest you http://forum.world.st/Contributing-to-VoyageMongo-improving-insertion-updating-speed-td4838806.html Peter On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com> wrote: > Searching the archives, I found an interesting comment [1]: > "I think the UUIDGenerator in the image produces UUIDs which are good > enough for MC. " - Levente Uzonyi > > I am pretty well confused by UUIDs in general (they seem magical) and > Pharo's implementation. The use case I have in mind is a file library which > imports files into a single folder, but changes their names to something > guaranteed to be unique so that they don't overwrite each other. Would > UUIDs > work in that case? Would the image ones be "good enough"? Are > primitive-generated UUIDs guaranteed to always be unique if, say, I move > the > image to another OS and continue generating them with another VM? Thanks! > > [1] http://forum.world.st/UUID-and-Cog-tp2955687p2957172.html > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/UUIDs-tp4842189.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
