On Thursday, January 13, 2011 5:54:17 PM UTC+1, TimDaly wrote: [snip] > In sum, I'm suggesting that it isn't very lispy to use > hierarchical namespace naming conventions. > I think all you said is very true... *if* the user of a namespace is allowed to change its name (i.e. Common Lisp's RENAME-PACKAGE). In Java, you obviously can't; I don't know Clojure well enough, but I suspect you can't, either. So, in case two third-party namespaces collide, there's no solution. Thus a collision-avoiding naming scheme becomes more important. (Note: I'm not advocating the blind use of Java conventions; in my "Dynaspring" project, which is coded in a mix of Lisp and Java, the Java package is just "dynaspring" and the Lisp one is :spring, because I find it very improbable that someone else will release another library using the same package names and that someone else will use both libraries in his or her project).
Just my .02€ Alessio -- 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
