jerry gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/1/05, Matt Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > User Defined Namespaces > > All HLLs should prefix any namespaces with the lowercased name of > > the HLL (so there's no question of what to capitalize). So Perl 5's > > CGI module should be stored under perl5::CGI. This eliminates any > > accidental collisions between languages. > > > why would there be a question of capitalization if the HLL name is > used as is, instead of lowercased? (e.g. Perl5::CGI.) or, in the case > of my example above, PERL::CGI and Perl::CGI. i understand it looks > like there won't be a Perl namespace, but one for each version, but > i'm sure you get the point. maybe i don't understand who (or what) is > responsible for doing the capitalization.
Alright, let me lay out my motivation for saying this: Pugs already has (limited?) support for using Perl 5 modules inside of Perl 6. The syntax they've used for this is C<use perl5:DBI>, which is to say that they've lowercased the name of the language. And I rather like that. With that in mind, there are two possible ways to name namespaces and compilers: 1. Lowercase or uppercase them all. The Pugs code works with little or no effort. 2. Capitalize them properly (ie, Perl5). Now there needs to be a special mapping from "perl5" to "Perl5". And Pugs now has to learn about each language that it wants to use before it can use it. (Alternately, Pugs could start using C<use Perl5:DBI>, but I'm not really considering that.) (2) is what I'm hoping to avoid when I say that we should lowercase them (and lowercase the names of compilers). -- matt diephouse http://matt.diephouse.com
