On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 03:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
Jeff Rose wrote:
> On Jul 9, 6:22 pm, Mike Meyer 620...@mired.org> wrote:
> > How have you managed to miss the second half of "that's the way they
> > do it in Java", which is "and we need to interoperate with other JVM
> > languages." Like it or not, one
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 3:42 AM, Jeff Rose wrote:
> Luckily for us, I think the tide is already rising on this
> conversation. Most prominent Clojure libraries are adopting the same
> packaging scheme as clojure.core, and we are uploading our libraries
> to the wild and crazy, totally uncensored
On 10 июл, 14:42, Jeff Rose wrote:
> I also disagree with this concept of putting the language in the
> package name. One of the benefits of compiling down to a common
> runtime is that we don't need to care what language something was
> written in. I think this kind of meta-data, along with the
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Mike Meyer
wrote:
>>As another suggestion how about clj.handle.library e.g
>>clj.mired.proclog
>>clj.weavejester.compojure
>>clj.acme-corp.dynamite
>
> Why should I prefer clj.mired, shared with gods knows who over org.mired,
> shared with nobody?
You wouldn't; s
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Saul Hazledine wrote:
>
> As another suggestion how about clj.handle.library e.g
> clj.mired.proclog
> clj.weavejester.compojure
> clj.acme-corp.dynamite
+1
martin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To
On 10 July 2010 09:06, James Reeves wrote:
> On 9 July 2010 17:46, Paul Moore wrote:
>> Is there any benefit to using a name like foo.core (or foo.api) rather
>> than simply foo (beyond sytlistic considerations, that is)?
>
> Clojure compiles "foo" to a package-less class called "foo".
> "foo.cio
On Jul 9, 6:22 pm, Mike Meyer wrote:
> How have you managed to miss the second half of "that's the way they
> do it in Java", which is "and we need to interoperate with other JVM
> languages." Like it or not, one of the biggest draws of Clojure is
> that it interoperates with Java.
Nothing abou
"Saul Hazledine" wrote:
>On Jul 10, 12:16 am, Mike Meyer 620...@mired.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
>>
>> j-g-faustus wrote:
>> > That said, I would leap at a chance to shorten Java names, even if it
>> > were just to chop off the leading "com" or "org".
>>
>> As the ow
2010/7/10 Meikel Brandmeyer
> Hello Laurent,
>
> Am 09.07.2010 um 18:30 schrieb Laurent PETIT:
>
> > But still I prefer to have the library name at the end of the namespace,
> it's easier to spot than in the middle (e.g. I prefer net.cgrand.parsley to
> paredit.core)
>
> Now that is a strange arg
Hello Laurent,
Am 09.07.2010 um 18:30 schrieb Laurent PETIT:
> But still I prefer to have the library name at the end of the namespace, it's
> easier to spot than in the middle (e.g. I prefer net.cgrand.parsley to
> paredit.core)
Now that is a strange argument. net.cgrand.parsley vs. parsley.a
On 9 July 2010 17:46, Paul Moore wrote:
> Is there any benefit to using a name like foo.core (or foo.api) rather
> than simply foo (beyond sytlistic considerations, that is)?
Clojure compiles "foo" to a package-less class called "foo".
"foo.ciore" is compiled to a class called "core" in the packa
On Jul 10, 12:16 am, Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
>
> j-g-faustus wrote:
> > That said, I would leap at a chance to shorten Java names, even if it
> > were just to chop off the leading "com" or "org".
>
> As the owner of mired.org, but not of mired.com (and I don't
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
j-g-faustus wrote:
> That said, I would leap at a chance to shorten Java names, even if it
> were just to chop off the leading "com" or "org".
As the owner of mired.org, but not of mired.com (and I don't know the
registered owner) or .net, or of that domain
On Jul 9, 8:14 pm, James Reeves wrote:
> Ruby and Rubygems has been using single-segment namespaces for years,
> with no major problems. I don't think name clashes are a problem in
> practise, because projects tend to have original names.
It works up to a point. It is claimed that university-leve
On 9 July 2010 17:30, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> Indeed, foo.api sounds better than foo.core to me, now than I'm exposed to
> that (core sounds more like 'internals'). But still I prefer to have the
> library name at the end of the namespace, it's easier to spot than in the
> middle (e.g. I prefer net
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 19:14:00 +0100
James Reeves wrote:
> On 8 July 2010 16:56, Chas Emerick wrote:
> > Clojars is a disaster as an authoritative software artifact repository IMO,
> > and nothing about how it's being used should be taken as a template for
> > anything else.
> Ruby and Rubygems has
On 8 July 2010 16:56, Chas Emerick wrote:
> Clojars is a disaster as an authoritative software artifact repository IMO,
> and nothing about how it's being used should be taken as a template for
> anything else.
Ruby and Rubygems has been using single-segment namespaces for years,
with no major pr
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 11:09 PM, j-g-faustus
wrote:
> From their FAQ on the same page:
> - I have a patched version of the foo project developed at foo.com,
> what groupId should I use?
> * When you patch / modify a third party project, that patched version
> becomes your project and therefore sho
Hello,
2010/7/9 Saul Hazledine
> On Jul 8, 8:38 pm, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> > My opinion: no need to create problems when there already are accepted
> > solutions.
> >
> > In the java world, there are conventions for naming things. Stick with
> them.
> >
>
> I do see your point and if this is th
On Jul 8, 8:38 pm, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> My opinion: no need to create problems when there already are accepted
> solutions.
>
> In the java world, there are conventions for naming things. Stick with them.
>
I do see your point and if this is the way the consensus moves I'll
follow it. However,
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 03:01:01 -0700 (PDT)
Jeff Rose wrote:
> I've asked myself this same question 50 times now. My best experience
> so far with a community that had packages was Ruby, and it was
> incredibly simple. Everyone can choose whatever name they like for
> their package as long as it is
On Jul 9, 5:58 am, Mike Meyer wrote:
> The other non- project requirement (a page linking the project to the domain
> name) is pretty much contrary to the quote from the Java specification.
By my reading, they are talking about something different - the
"groupId" which identifies the project i
I've asked myself this same question 50 times now. My best experience
so far with a community that had packages was Ruby, and it was
incredibly simple. Everyone can choose whatever name they like for
their package as long as it isn't up on rubygems yet. I am strongly
in favor of dropping these r
"Armando Blancas" wrote:
>> So they wouldn't object if I wanted to use my wordpress or sourceforge
>> domains?
>
>If I understand this correctly, they wouldn't:
>
>http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html
By my reading, they would. A wordpress domain is simply ou
> So they wouldn't object if I wanted to use my wordpress or sourceforge
> domains?
If I understand this correctly, they wouldn't:
http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" gro
"Armando Blancas" wrote:
>> Personally, I trust the inventors of the convention more than people
>> running a single project. But that begs two questions: how do they
>> define "ownership" of a domain,
>
>Sounds like common usage; e.g. as the owner of mired.org you get to
>use it as groupId.
So
> Personally, I trust the inventors of the convention more than people
> running a single project. But that begs two questions: how do they
> define "ownership" of a domain,
Sounds like common usage; e.g. as the owner of mired.org you get to
use it as groupId.
and (the question that launched the
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 21:29:56 +0200
Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 08.07.2010 um 18:52 schrieb Mike Meyer:
>
> > People seem to be confused by the Java namespace convention deriving
> > names from DNS. They think that the names actually have something to
> > do with the domains in question
My opinion: no need to create problems when there already are accepted
solutions.
In the java world, there are conventions for naming things. Stick with them.
-> You want to fly under the radar in your enterprise with jars full of
clojure sources ? Don't get catched because your lib risks a clash
Hi,
Am 08.07.2010 um 18:52 schrieb Mike Meyer:
> People seem to be confused by the Java namespace convention deriving
> names from DNS. They think that the names actually have something to
> do with the domains in question. This isn't the case. Quoting the
> Java Language Specification "The sugg
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 09:22:01 -0700
Phil Hagelberg wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> >> So maybe it's best to use the Java convention after all?
> >> It has been proven to scale, is widely used and plays well with
> >> whatever else is running on the JVM, which ar
I'll do the simple thing when I can, so in those cases I use foo.
On Jul 7, 9:13 am, James Reeves wrote:
> I've kinda asked this question before, but I framed in the context of
> a suggestion, and the discussion got bogged down with no real answer.
>
> So this time, let me keep it simple: if I ha
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
>> So maybe it's best to use the Java convention after all?
>> It has been proven to scale, is widely used and plays well with
>> whatever else is running on the JVM, which are strong points in its
>> favor.
>
> I still don't buy it. The com
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 2:25 AM, j-g-faustus wrote:
> On Jul 8, 5:21 am, Mike Meyer 620...@mired.org> wrote:
>
> So maybe it's best to use the Java convention after all?
> It has been proven to scale, is widely used and plays well with
> whatever else is running on the JVM, which are strong points
On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:15 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
What happens with the prefix-with-your-domain prefix can be seen on
clojars at the moment. People upload stuff under names they don't own.
There are several vimclojure packages. Not a single of these are
projects on their own right. Just var
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 07:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Jul 8, 7:25 am, j-g-faustus wrote:
>
> > So maybe it's best to use the Java convention after all?
> > It has been proven to scale, is widely used and plays well with
> > whatever else is running on the JVM, which are
Hi,
On Jul 8, 7:25 am, j-g-faustus wrote:
> So maybe it's best to use the Java convention after all?
> It has been proven to scale, is widely used and plays well with
> whatever else is running on the JVM, which are strong points in its
> favor.
I still don't buy it. The company I work for chan
On Jul 8, 5:21 am, Mike Meyer wrote:
> You're overlooking that one of the major benefits of Clojure is that
> it interoperates with other JVM languages. So any idiom it uses needs
> to have some assurance that it won't clash with an idiom used by those
> other languages.
It's a good point.
> Tha
>
>
> Why would you ever type that more than once? Just use :as.
>
>
Because you use it in more than one file / project.
--
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
On Jul 7, 2010, at 8:53 PM, j-g-faustus wrote:
> The disadvantage is of course that you end up with names like
> org.apache.http.client.params.ClientPNames/
> CONNECTION_MANAGER_FACTORY_CLASS_NAME
> which gets old really quick if you have to type it a lot :)
Why would you ever type that more than
On Wed, 7 Jul 2010 18:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
j-g-faustus wrote:
> On Jul 7, 7:55 pm, James Reeves wrote:
> > For the purposes of this discussion, let us assume that "foo" is a
> > suitably unique library name, and it is highly unlikely there exist
> > any other libraries with the same name.
>
> It s
On Jul 7, 7:55 pm, James Reeves wrote:
> For the purposes of this discussion, let us assume that "foo" is a
> suitably unique library name, and it is highly unlikely there exist
> any other libraries with the same name.
It sounds like Clojure doesn't have an idiom for namespace names yet,
so I gu
"Meikel Brandmeyer" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Am 07.07.2010 um 21:41 schrieb Mike Meyer:
>
>> Why bother renaming it when you move?
>
>Why come into a situation where bothering is a question?
You would have to ask the people at sun.com who created the convention that one.
>PS: You K-9 Mail sends every me
Hi,
Am 07.07.2010 um 21:41 schrieb Mike Meyer:
> Why bother renaming it when you move?
Why come into a situation where bothering is a question?
Sincerely
Meikel
PS: You K-9 Mail sends every message twice.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure"
"Meikel Brandmeyer" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Am 07.07.2010 um 18:13 schrieb James Reeves:
>
>> - foo.core
>> - com.github.weavejester.foo
>
>I would go with one of these two. At the moment I prefer the former. I think
>putting domain names in the package is suboptimal for a quite simple reason.
>I'm a h
On Jul 7, 5:24 pm, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> if you intend to share the library, then use the classical prefix notation:
>
> * either of the form net.reeves.james.foo ( or any reversed tld you "own" )
> * either of the form com.yourcorp.foo
>
com.read.to.easy.that.not.its.but
--
You received
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:55 PM, James Reeves wrote:
> On 7 July 2010 17:24, Laurent PETIT wrote:
>> Of course, if your library has an especially cryptic name (as we have
>> with counterclockwise: ccw), then having also directly foo may also
>> not interfere with other's namespaces. That's the pat
Hi,
Am 07.07.2010 um 18:13 schrieb James Reeves:
> - foo.core
> - com.github.weavejester.foo
I would go with one of these two. At the moment I prefer the former. I think
putting domain names in the package is suboptimal for a quite simple reason.
I'm a hobbyist. I don't own a domain. Eh? What
On 7 July 2010 17:24, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> Of course, if your library has an especially cryptic name (as we have
> with counterclockwise: ccw), then having also directly foo may also
> not interfere with other's namespaces. That's the path we took for
> counterclockwise, and our top-level namesp
This is not in answer to the question, but I just wanted to say: I
love that fact that Clojure got namespaces "right" in the sense of
allowing aliasing on import. Some languages don't do this, and you end
up with very difficult naming issues since you suddenly have a huge
desire to keep it short *w
Hi,
2010/7/7 James Reeves :
> I've kinda asked this question before, but I framed in the context of
> a suggestion, and the discussion got bogged down with no real answer.
>
> So this time, let me keep it simple: if I have a small Clojure
> library, "foo", which only has one namespace, what is the
51 matches
Mail list logo
