"package" and "module", we only need one. Most other language only have
one. The more, the more complicate.
libstd.so: What we call it? "library" "package" "crate"?? other language
usually call it "library".
std::io::fs: We call it "module", other language usually call it "package"
or "module".
So, whatever we call it, package and module, we only need ONE of them, and
let another gone.
2013/12/13 Felix S. Klock II <pnkfe...@mozilla.com>
> On 13/12/2013 12:53, spir wrote:
>
>> I think this is a good possibility, make the module/crate organisation
>> mirror the filesystem (or the opposite):
>> * 1 module = 1 file of code
>> * 1 package = 1 dir
>> This may be limiting at times, possibility one may want multi-module
>> files and multi-file modules.
>>
> Yes, one may indeed want those things. In particular, *I* want
> multi-module files.
>
> I do not want to move towards a Java-style approach where the package
> nesting structure needs to match the file/directory nesting structure.
> Being able to declare nested modules within a file is very useful for
> flexible namespace control.
>
> I like our current support for nesting modules in files, and breaking them
> out into separate files as one wants.
>
> But then again, I also think that the current approach of { `extern
> mod`... `use`... `mod`... } is pretty understandable once you, well,
> understand it. My main complaint has been about the slightly
> context-dependent interpretation of paths [1], but that's pretty minor. So
> perhaps I have the wrong point-of-view for interpreting these suggestions
> for change.
>
> Cheers,
> -Felix
>
> [1] https://github.com/mozilla/rust/issues/10910
>
>
> On 13/12/2013 12:53, spir wrote:
>
>> On 12/13/2013 11:43 AM, Diggory Hardy wrote:
>>
>>> What would you do?
>>>
>>> Have no structure (no mod)? Or automatically create it from the file
>>> structure?
>>>
>>
>> I think this is a good possibility, make the module/crate organisation
>> mirror the filesystem (or the opposite):
>> * 1 module = 1 file of code
>> * 1 package = 1 dir
>> This may be limiting at times, possibility one may want multi-module
>> files and multi-file modules. But this forms a good, simple base (anyway,
>> we have mini & maxi modules & code files, whatever the logical & physical
>> organisations). Another point is that very often we have package (I mean
>> crate ;-) sub-dirs which are not packages themselves. Then, as usual, we'd
>> have a special code file representing a package at its top dir (the same
>> name as the package, or a magic name like 'main').
>>
>> Then, module sharing is code file sharing, and package management is dir
>> management (trivially .zip-ed or .tar.gz-ed, and then the name "package" is
>> here for something).
>>
>> Denis
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rust-dev mailing list
>> Rust-dev@mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
>>
>
>
> --
> irc: pnkfelix on irc.mozilla.org
> email: {fklock, pnkfelix}@mozilla.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rust-dev mailing list
> Rust-dev@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
>
--
by *Liigo*, http://blog.csdn.net/liigo/
Google+ https://plus.google.com/105597640837742873343/
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
