The problem is that you cannot forbid that now.
Or do you? what is the impact of forbidden that now on existing code?
Stef
On Oct 12, 2008, at 11:19 AM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
Let me put it in another way.
Is there a situation where a package named MyPackage should require
another package MyPackage-Foo.
As we experienced, this evil dependency brings inconsistencies when
saving MyPackage.
What would it a nice way to prevent such situation ?
I imagine that this is to avoid mistake like
Moose
Moose-X
Moose-Y
and that people do it
Moose-All
Moose-X
Moose-Y
Even these situations are not clean.
We should have
MooseAll
MooseX
MooseY
I do not see a reason to have a - within the name.
this is just a character as any other.
So I would not do anything special with it.
If you have 3 class categories:
Moose
Moose-X
Moose-Y
It means that the package Moose contains Moose-X and Moose-Y
definitions
In Visualworks there is no dash convention, which is much better...
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
