Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Roy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... >> > A class asserting, e.g., "implements IPainter", doesn't thereby risk >> > being accidentally misused where an IGunslinger is required (OTOH, >> > implementing >1 of these IS a bother, but that's sort of inevitable). >> >> I suppose, but all you've really done is move the problem to a different >> namespace. Which IPainter did you have in mind? The one that has to do >> with people who apply oils to canvas, or the one that has to do with ropes >> that are used to tie up rowboats? > >In Java's excellent naming convention for modules, there's no ambiguity: >I specifically requested it.aleax.artists.IPainter, or else specifically >requested com.panix.roy.boating.IPainter -- nothing stops any language >with a structured namespace for modules from using that convention.
This is true. This is one of the things Java does well. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
