My namespace proposal described in Yet Another Try

Chris Muller asqueaker at gmail.com
Thu Sep 20 02:36:30 UTC 2007


> E.g., if for some reason I need to load both Seaside 2.6 and 2.8 in a
> single image, I'm still stuck because they will both use Seaside:: or
> WA:: as a prefix. I would need to change the prefix on the fly while
> filing the code in (or loading it from MC) and, symmetrically, to
> rename the client classes to use one prefix or the other.

Recall also that method extensions are part of packages too and
currently suffer from potential name-collisions just like classes.
Unfortunately this is a much harder problem to solve, and reason why I
would never try to load two versions of the same framework into the
same image; i.e., because different implementations of the same method
extension may collide.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list