On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 15:30, Rayne <disciplera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It isn't nearly as big a deal as you think it is. I'm guessing you have a
> single file called 'fs.clj' with the namespace 'fs', right?
> mkdir src/fs/
> mv src/fs.clj src/fs/core.clj
>
> and then edit the file and change the namespace to fs.core. Why is that such
> a big deal? I understand that you're coming from Python, but Clojure isn't,
> and never will be Python. If you came from COBOL would you want to write
> your code in all caps? Nobody is asking you to do this for fun. This is a
> Clojure idiom that everybody uses, and it isn't only for you but for users
> of your code.

This is a retarded 'convention', and it isn't really much of a
convention at that. Just because Clojure itself has a 'core.clj',
doesn't mean everyone else needs one now too. I blame Leiningen's
defaults. For counter-examples, take a look at clojure-contrib. The
only core.clj in there is for proposed additions to clojure.core
itself.

If I were writing a library 'flub', I'd expected the main file the
user is expected to :use to be named flub.clj and supporting files to
be flub/SOMETHING.clj.  If I wanted to make sure it was disambiguated,
say if I intended it as a library and not a stand-alone application, I
might call the namespace PREFIX.flub and PREFIX.flub.something, where
PREFIX is something one might reasonably expect to be unique, e.g.
bpsmithmannschott.flub.

// Ben

-- 
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

Reply via email to