On Tuesday 29/10/2013 at 03:50, Dmitry Boyarintsev wrote:
Then the John Douglas and Douglas McKey are running into the same
issue.
Both guys (while living on different parts of the world) created the
same "douglas" namespace!
OK, ok, my example was bad. I would apply the exact same namespace
rules as recommended by Java. In a real situation you should use your
domain name for the namespace.
But I get what you say... conflicts could still occur. And so too in
Java, but the usage of the "company domain name as namespace" greatly
reduces the chances of a conflict.
Is it much different than just extending the prefix "M" to "MFP"?
I must admit, Martin (from MSEgui project) was silly to simply use the
"M" prefix. It is too easy to have conflicts. That is why I choose
"fpg_" as the unit prefix and "Tfpg" as the class prefix for the fpGUI
Toolkit project. The chances of conflicts are much less, but obviously
still possible.
P.S. Offtopic: I personally find it horrible to call a unit "classes"
(it's fine for RTL, since it's started this way, but any other library
- it is horrible). Nobody calls their units like "functions" or
"functionsandprodures"
Sure, but much more common unit name issues is Constants.pas or
Utils.pas.
They are ideal names, but are too common, and often cause conflicts
with other projects or component packages.
Regards,
Graeme
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
