Well, at least part of why it's worked fine so far is because anyone
who created a package had to go through jsoftware to publish it...

As more people start to share j packages on github, there's a
greater chance of running into naming conflicts.

(... And also version dependency conflicts.)


On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 2:21 PM Eric Iverson <[email protected]>
wrote:

> When I first designed/implemented locales, I fully expected that it would
> be revisited at some point along the lines you suggest. But the flat
> structure with copath has proven more resilient than expected.
>
> I look forward to suggestions in this area. But we want to keep it simple.
>
> A dead simple scheme like prefixes (j for jsoftware) similar to common port
> numbers goes a long way in avoiding name conflicts. Not all in theory, but
> perhaps enough in practice.
>
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 12:02 PM Michal Wallace <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > very glad to hear this!
> >
> > I think "big footprint" is what I was really getting at.
> >
> > Looking at my own code, I tend to use these "accessors" a lot more often
> in
> > explicit code than in tacit.
> > I still think there's a good idea there, but I now think it could be
> > handled better with a verb-creating library
> > than a special thing for names.
> >
> > I do have another thought about the `::` thing though, which is a
> > new/better hierarchical naming convention for locales.
> > Right now, importing a module might result in multiple conames being
> > defined. (For example, importing my own
> > UI library results in a coname being created for each ui widget class,
> and
> > there's nothing I can do about that.)
> >
> > I worry that as more people start to create their own modules, we will
> run
> > into issues with name collisions.
> > I would love to be able to have `load 'tangentstorm/j-kvm'` generate
> > exactly one top-level namespace, kvm,
> > with other things underneath it:   kvm::vm for viewmat,   kvm::vt for
> > terminal codes kvm::ui::edit , kvm::ui::list , and so on for individual
> > widgets.
> >
> > I'm not necessarily trying to "claim'  what "::" means, but... it's such
> a
> > "big footprint"
> > syntax, it should be used for something big.
> >
> > (I'll try to write this and my '..' thing as proposals on github this
> > weekend)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:46 AM Eric Iverson <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Michal,
> > >
> > > Your comment: "what's up with this new `name::` syntax?"
> > > stirred up interesting stuff.
> > >
> > > The change was in a beta, so was intended to promote discussion.
> > >
> > > Henry's response: "Possession is nine points of the law. :)"
> > > did have a smile, was a simple fact, and should absolutely not be taken
> > to
> > > mean that the discussion is over. Jsoftware has a good track record of
> > > backing out of mistakes :)
> > >
> > > Your comment triggered a serious new look. We (back to that in a
> minute)
> > > decided that:
> > > 1. the change would lose a whole whack of good primitives: a:: A::
> abc::
> > > etc::
> > > 2. self effacing is for esoteric performance and should not have such a
> > big
> > > footprint
> > >
> > > The next beta will probably adopt a spelling of name_: for self
> effacing.
> > >
> > > Your message triggered good discussion and time will tell if it boils
> > down
> > > to a solid proposal. Though I confess to being very leery of more
> > mechanism
> > > for assignment in tacit.
> > >
> > > The WE referred to earlier is myself, Chris, Henry, and Bill. This has
> > > worked reasonably well since we lost Ken and Roger had less and less
> > > involvement.
> > >
> > > We don't vote, proceed cautiously, and with consensus.
> > >
> > > The time is overdue for the involvement of more people and more formal
> > > mechanisms. We will move in that direction, but cautiously. Probably
> the
> > > first step will be creating a more appropriate media than the
> programming
> > > forum for language changes.
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to