Hi, Why not just call it, say, Test.QuickCheck2?
I think module names should reflect only their functionality. I don't see how "External" or "Contrib" or "Chalmers" would say anything useful about the functionality of the modules. A while ago I sent a proposal for "package mounting", which I think would let us avoid this whole issue: http://www.haskell.org//pipermail/libraries/2005-June/004009.html I am opposed to a situation such as Java's, in which every module is permanently fixed somewhere in a huge module hierarchy, for the reasons I describe in the proposal (namely, in part because I don't think that global-name-choosing should be such a fundamental part of coding - as you said, it is a source of agony). The proposal was an attempt to describe an alternative approach. I think the ideal solution would be: - Your code is released in a package with modules named "Batch", "Poly", "Utils", etc., i.e. with no qualification. - The package has a default mount point of Test.QuickCheck. If people want the old version, then they can specify the old package instead of the new package on the compiler/interpreter command line. The response to my proposal was semi-positive, but I don't think any work has gone towards implementing it (certainly not by myself). Cheers, Frederik On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 01:02:51PM +0200, Koen Claessen wrote: > Dear all, > > For the past couple of years, I have been quietly hacking on a brand new > version of QuickCheck with lots of cool features. I have been > distributing copies to some friends, but have not released any official > package. > > Now, after lots of peer pressure, the time has come that I want to > release the current version as a Cabal package. > > I have been agonizing however over where in the module hierarchy the new > QuickCheck package should be. > > There is currently an old QuickCheck version in the standard hierarchy > in Test.QuickCheck. As the new QuickCheck is incompatible with the old > one, I do not want to override that place. Rather, I would like to > create my own little space in the hierarchy where the new version can > sit and develop. > > It feels to me that there should be a convention that people use to add > their own contributions to the module hierarchy without the danger of > clashing with other packages. > > Proposals: > > Contrib.Chalmers.QuickCheck > External.Chalmers.QuickCheck > Chalmers.QuickCheck > Contrib.Test.QuickCheck > Contrib.QuickCheck > > The first three I like -- but not the last one; I don't want to rule out > anyone else (except for my own colleagues :-) making their own version > of QuickCheck and releasing it somewhere in the tree. > > What does one think? > > Regards, > /Koen > > PS1. Previously discussions about this were referred to the libraries > mailing list but I feel that this is of interest to the larger crowd too. > > PS2. I welcome myself back to the Haskell mailing list after years of > inactivity :-) > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell mailing list > Haskell@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell > -- http://ofb.net/~frederik/ _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
