On 10 July 2010 09:06, James Reeves <jree...@weavejester.com> wrote: > On 9 July 2010 17:46, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> 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 package "foo". > > Package-less classes are a bit problematic if you want to call them > from another Java package, IIRC. But if your library isn't intended to > be AOT-compiled and used from Java, I don't think it makes a > difference.
Ah! I hadn't realised the package/class distinction - a result of my having no Java background. Thanks for the explanation, I can now understand the trade-offs better. Paul -- 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
