On Jul 8, 5:21 am, Mike Meyer <mwm-keyword-googlegroups. 620...@mired.org> wrote: > You're overlooking that one of the major benefits of Clojure is that > it interoperates with other JVM languages. So any idiom it uses needs > to have some assurance that it won't clash with an idiom used by those > other languages.
It's a good point. > That the Oracle/Sun/java way scales is a good reason to do it their > way. Except that I notice that Sun doesn't do that: the libraries I've > got from them are javax.comm, *not* com.sun.javax.comm (being renamed > to com.oracle.sun.javax.comm, I suppose). As you say, Java and Clojure get special dispensation. > Just so long as everyone follows that convention. As far as I know, > Sun didn't do anything to enforce that, or even to prevent people from > shipping code in namespaces in a domain name they don't own. Yes, it's convention only. But it seems like almost everyone follows the convention, perhaps because it was part of the language specification http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/third_edition/html/names.html#73307 and included in every language tutorial. Or perhaps in part because it plays to individual or organizational vanity when you can stamp your identity right there in the code. I don't think there is anything directly stopping J. Random Hacker from shipping code as com.ibm or com.apple, although their lawyers might have something to say about that. So maybe it's best to use the Java convention after all? It has been proven to scale, is widely used and plays well with whatever else is running on the JVM, which are strong points in its favor. jf -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
