Hi all!

>> This would mean that file-outs and Monticello packages would
>> contain "::", am I correct? In this case, we can't go back
>> because all source past that point can't be loaded by a
>> non-Göran image.
>>
>> Gulik.
>
> It wouldn't be a Goran image, it'd be a standard squeak image, since the
> whole point would be to include that fix in the base image to allow us to
> at
> least take one tiny step in the direction of a solution that formalizes
> what
> we're *already doing with class prefixes*.

Yes, very well put. And also, check:
   http://swiki.krampe.se/gohu/35

...where I describe the minimal fix - module testing extensively, but as
you can see it is TINY. So if you happen to be sitting with an old Squeak
image and want to load new code using ::-names, just smack that changeset
in and go.


>  Why?  Because no one will
> accept
> any other solution, look in the archives, this battles has been fought
> many
> times.

Again, very well put.

> Any "real" namespaces solution will eventually be rejected because it's
> not
> a small change and a vocal part of the community doesn't want it, just
> wait,
> you'll see.

And also - all people rejecting any "real" solution (although I tend to
argue with that choice of word) - are not entirely wrong either.

I mean, we aren't really *suffering* here. :) It just happens to be a
"nagging itch" that we - as developers - like to approach somehow.

Also, note that given my proposal you CAN actually "tack on" additional
mechanisms like for example imports (for context dependent resolving). I
just tend to think they aren't really needed.

regards, Göran