Doing it simply by ever longer function names limits you when it comes to
future possible additions where instantiation and member variables make the
solution more elegant.
The added code complexity that holding that door open in the current code is
As far as speed goes in my case the bottleneck will always be I/O, I'm not
crunching weather or CERN data.
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Alexander Burger <a...@software-lab.de>wrote:
> Hi Henrik,
> > I spend 40 hours per week in a world where the global namespace is more
> > polluted than the Rhine was in the sixties.
> I understand :)
> > I don't want to contribute a iota towards such a situation in PicoLisp.
> Technically, it is an interesting approach. The problem is just that
> using a class for this purpose is rather inefficient.
> A call like
> (foo> '+Pckg <arg>)
> is in no regard more encapsulating the namespace then
> (foo.Pckg <arg>)
> but it is more tedious to write and read, takes up two cells more than
> the second (4 versus 2), and eats up performance at each call for the
> method lookup.
> Still, both strategies don't guarantee that another programmer comes up
> with the same idea, using "Pckg" for his package.
> The safest way is of course to use transient symbols for all non-
> exported names.
> - Alex
> UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:email@example.com?subject=Unsubscribe