>From: goran at krampe.se
>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: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 10:22:22 +0200
>
>Hi!
>
>The conclusion is false - they *do* help avoid clashes, but sure they
>don't prevent clashes from ever being even theoretically possible. And
>so? If prefixing didn't actually help avoid clashes - then why do you
>think people use prefixes in the first place?
>

They help avoid prefixes exactly as much as prefixing does.  No more, no 
less.  What we are basically talking about is manual prefixing with a few 
letters vs. manual prefixing with (probably) a few letters plus two colons, 
plus the posibility to hide the prefix with the colon solution.

So the two options are almost the same except the colon solution makes the 
classes uglier, but there are more options about what to do with the 
prefixes since the tools can detect them.

>You lost me. Yes, seeing Foo::Bar indicates that Bar is not unique in
>your image.
>

I was responding to the assertion that we would only ever see the short 
name.  But the system as I understood (and you seem to be describing here 
again) it would show all conflicting names explicitly and the example given 
had lots of conflicting names.  But I guess it is a moot point.  Once the 
tools know it there are more options (e.g. if I am in a certain namespace 
hide all references to that namespace, just show references outside of it 
for conflicting classes).

_________________________________________________________________
Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from 
Microsoft Office Live 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/