On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Thanks
> see http://www.squeaksource.com/Namespace.html we did that some years
> ago
> But we have to change its design because we separated trait/class/
> global binding and it was not good.
>
> I think that we need namespaces but not a la VW. So names seems good
> (but I can be wrong)
>
> About Names...
>        - import: '*' is not a so good design decision (we see it daily with
> Java) but it is probably necessary.
>        - One namespace per category wow! Probably for a start. :) but
> clearly if we want one per package (which I hope
>        we want).
>        - The export clause is nice to have (even if I'm not sure about
> export: from: since export from itself self can be
>        more important than from another namespace).
>
>        All in all even if I can often argue with andreas I like his design
> (may be I'm wrong).
>        I like the fact that there is no nesting. I prefer that design if I
> understand it correctly
>        over macro like expansion as proned by goran (even if his solution
> was backward compatible).
>        It is close to what we did with
> http://www.squeaksource.com/Namespace.html
>  ( we did not have an export
>        close if I remember correctly but were thinking about adding one).
>        Now I would like to see where we defined them. Ideally I would put
> them on Package.
>

There is also this: http://gulik.pbwiki.com/Namespaces
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to