Squeak and Namespaces
azreal1977 at hotmail.com
Fri Dec 1 17:24:45 UTC 2006
>From: "Ramon Leon" <ramon.leon at allresnet.com>
>Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers
>list<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>To: "'The general-purpose Squeak developers
>list'"<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>Subject: RE: Squeak and Namespaces
>Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:03:18 -0700
> > Hi ramon
> > The point that andreas raised is valid. My question is what
> > do namespaces really bring us?
>They would let me type User instead of SSUser, SPUser, KTUser, FAUser, and
>if multiple User classes were detected, they'd ask me which one I meant.
>And if one was in the current package, it could assume I meant that one and
>not have me think about the prefix.
> > So conclusion simple namespaces do not help avoid clashes.
>Yes they do.
What (I think) he is saying is: Most people are prefixing anyway (I always
do), so if you get a clash then you probably tried to make another SPUser.
So just putting a couple of colons between SP and User isn't going to save
you in that case.
>Manually prefixing classes to prevent name clashes, and being forced to use
>those long names when the tools could do it for us, and hide it from us in
It isn't going to hide it from you. It will hide the prefix *so long as no
other class in the system has that name*. As soon as *one* duplication
happens *all* ambiguous classes will be fully prefixed in the source code.
In the entire image.
And we can't do it the way you suggest anyway (well we could but it would be
even more complicated) because if the classes are fully qualified every time
(they are) and the browser hides all but the actual class every time (it
does not) then how do we know from looking at someone else's code which
actual class they are talking about? Seeing colons is the indicator that
there are two or more classes in the image with the same base name.
>And again I'll say, it's a tiny fix that automates something that we do
>manually now anyway, and is a pain in the ass. I don't like prefixing my
>class names, it's ugly. I pump objects across web services to .Net, where
>my class names are nice and pretty and simple, because .Net supports
>namespaces, yet I'm forced to uglify them on the Squeak side because I
>name a class something simple in Squeak and feel even mildly safe about
For you it's ugly. I don't notice it at all (so far). So what is also
obvious from the traffic on this thread is that some people want it and some
people don't. So to me that means it should be a loadable module for those
who want it. And it is.
One thing we could think about here is to make some kind of automated tool
to switch between the two so that we could all be happy. If you make a
package that uses namespaces and I load it from squeakmap my system could
automatically turn your namespaces into prefixes and vice versa (ok, this
part is hard, but we could just make it manual on package upload).
MSN Shopping has everything on your holiday list. Get expert picks by style,
age, and price. Try it!
More information about the Squeak-dev