Jay McCarthy wrote on 11/30/2014 12:13 PM:
The documentation cited is making clear that there is NO connection
between the name of a package and the provided modules. There is no
such thing as a package namespace.
I'd really like there to be. For third-party packages.
Packages may find it convenient to build and provide reusable
functionality with many organizational names. This is particularly
true of "data", as many packages may have useful data structures.
Of course, as such support code becomes very useful and developed, it
makes sense to sprin it off into its own package.
Are you saying that `data` is some kind of classification of "what this
module is about", and in this case specifically, "this module, which is
part of some more specific package, happens to be regarding
general-purpose data structures, so we're putting it over here in the
`data` area of a shared namespace hierarchy"? If so, I don't understand
why that would be considered a good idea.
Neil V.
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
