Pardon my ignorance here. >From an application programmer's (which is what I used to be) point of view I'd want to be able to write/use code from multiple HLLs without any danger of them stamping all over each other's data.
I'd assumed Parrot would be enforcing namespace integrity and not assuming the "next layer up" was doing it correctly. What did I miss? Mike -- Mike Lacey Project Manager Partner Services 07717 458 268 On 02/12/05, Roger Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks Matt and Chip. It's going to take a while to digest all that, but > already I have a question: > > > Synopsis > > - Languages should contain their namespaces > > Suppose my application is multi-HLL. For example, some parts of it are > written in Python and some in Ruby. Suppose I take one small part that > is written in Python and decide to re-implement it in Ruby. > > Does this mean that I _must_ change its namespace? Or may I write it in > Ruby but keep it within a Python-compliant namespace? > > In other words, shouldn't namespaces and HLLs be orthogonal from > Parrot's point of view? I understand that most HLLs will want to use > their own conventions, and some will want a unique namespace prefix, but > should this be forced by Parrot? > > Regards, > Roger Browne > > > -- Mike Lacey Project Manager Partner Services 07717 458 268
