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
