On Friday, April 11, 2014 03:49:16 PM Ben Racine wrote:
> But, when a function really does logically belong to its first argument, I
> (sometimes) find myself missing the function namespacing inherent to those
> systems. I find myself wanting to do what one can do in R and inject a '.'
> into the function name just for the illusion of namespacing.
I'm not sure I fully understand your question, but there is real namespacing
available. Use modules and, if you want/need to force the user to include the
module name, just don't export the function from the module. A great example
is Pkg, which uses this for many of its functions to disambiguate meaning.
update() would be rather vague (what am I updating?), but Pkg.update() is
quite clear.
You can easily use the same technique yourself, with no conflict with Pkg:
module MyModule
function update()
println("blah")
end
end
MyModule.update()
Pkg.update()
--Tim
