Squeak and Namespaces
stephane.ducasse at free.fr
Thu Nov 30 12:12:16 UTC 2006
Just a question. Do you think that in practice nested namespaces are
needed (not in the context of Java).
I have the impression that this introduces complexity.
On 30 nov. 06, at 13:06, Lex Spoon wrote:
> tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> writes:
>> Forgive me if I'm being hopelessly naive here (remember, none of my
>> degrees are in CS ) but isn't namespaces something that has been
>> solved before? I mean, it's not exactly a new issue is it? Isn't
>> there a standard somewhere for dealing with them?
> It is an old issue that has seen a lot of research. I don't think
> there is a consensus on a good solution, though. Keep in mind that
> this stuff is related to the ongoing work on components, an area that
> seems to be nowhere near mined out.
> Practically, a Java-like solution seems pretty good. There is room
> for incremental improvement in that area, though. The generalized
> imports of Scala seem helpful, IMHO. As two examples of this (and
> attempting a Smalltalky syntax):
> import Core.Date -> CDate "import Core.Date, and"
> "rename it to CDate in"
> "this scope"
> import Deeply.Nested.[Package -> Pack]
> "make Pack be a shortened"
> "version of Deeply.Nested.Package"
> These are small improvements over Java, but I use them all the time.
More information about the Squeak-dev