On 9 July 2010 17:46, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is there any benefit to using a name like foo.core (or foo.api) rather > than simply foo (beyond sytlistic considerations, that is)?
Clojure compiles "foo" to a package-less class called "foo". "foo.ciore" is compiled to a class called "core" in the package "foo". Package-less classes are a bit problematic if you want to call them from another Java package, IIRC. But if your library isn't intended to be AOT-compiled and used from Java, I don't think it makes a difference. - James -- 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
