To provide examples, there’s no syntactic method in most languages for referencing things like method parameters, return values, or local variables within the method. In _javascript_, there’s no syntactic method for referring anonymous methods
is another. For these examples, tooling typically needs to contrive a convention when referring to them in analysis output, within a debugger or profiling tool, etc.
From: Larry Golding (Comcast) <>
Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 10:56 AM
To: Michael Fanning <>;
Subject: fullyQualifiedLogicalName syntax
Importance: High
The spec says:
The format of
fullyQualifiedLogicalName
SHALL be consistent with the programming language in which the programmatic construct specified by that logical location was expressed.
EXAMPLE 1: C:
create_process
EXAMPLE 2: C++:
Namespace1::Class::Method(int, double) const &&
EXAMPLE 3: C#:
Namespace1.Class.Method(string, int[])
But we’ve talked about loosening that SHALL because you had some examples where it didn’t make sense. (I placed a comment in the change draft for #145 to remind me to take this up with you.)
What’s the scenario where FQLN doesn’t match a programming language construct? Did it have to do with tools that analyzed in-memory object models rather than source code?
Larry
