(2011/05/09 15:18), Jamie Nguyen wrote: > Toshiharu Harada wrote: >> My understanding of initialize_domain is resetting the domain, >> which occurs in the existing "namespace". >> Personally, I prefer the new directive for "namespace" to imply >> creating/changing to a different "namespace". >> For example, change_namespace or transit_namespace, instead of >> initialize_namespace (I can live with initialize_namespace, though). > > Hmm, I see your point. My main reason for suggesting > initialize_namespace was to reduce the "overhead" on remembering many > different directives. We already have "file read foo" so I thought > "initialize_foo" might be appropriate. But I don't really mind either > way. I can live with transit_namespace.
My understanding is "domains" are under the namespace and different namespaces mean different worlds. For that reason, I wanted to emphasize namespace is more fundamental. However, I'm quite sure we can live with any directives. ;-) I can live with initialize_namespace, too. _______________________________________________ tomoyo-dev-en mailing list tomoyo-dev-en@lists.sourceforge.jp http://lists.sourceforge.jp/mailman/listinfo/tomoyo-dev-en
