<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Il giorno sab 12 dic 2020 alle ore 13:20 Henning Thielemann <<a href="mailto:lemming@henning-thielemann.de">lemming@henning-thielemann.de</a>> ha scritto:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
On Sat, 12 Dec 2020, Pasqualino "Titto" Assini wrote:<br>
<br>
> I don't actually see the problem in producing a hash of the API you use.<br>
> It is simply the hash of the list of your imports.<br>
> <br>
> Is this overspecific? In the sense that it is more restrictive than it couldĀ be?<br>
<br>
How do you address with a hash that added identifiers in an imported <br>
module do not harm if you import qualified or explicitly?<br>
<br>
How do you address changed type of an imported variable?</blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>The hash is obviously calculated on a normalised version of the module.</div><div><br></div><div>As part of this normalisation step, all references to external definitions are fully qualified.</div><div><br></div><div>And it is impossible to import a variable with a changed type, becauseĀ if the type had changed so would have its definition and therefore the hash of the imported module.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div>