On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
wrote:
Thanks see http://www.squeaksource.com/Namespace.html we did that some years ago But we have to change its design because we separated trait/class/ global binding and it was not good.
I think that we need namespaces but not a la VW. So names seems good (but I can be wrong)
About Names... - import: '*' is not a so good design decision (we see it daily with Java) but it is probably necessary. - One namespace per category wow! Probably for a start. :) but clearly if we want one per package (which I hope we want). - The export clause is nice to have (even if I'm not sure about export: from: since export from itself self can be more important than from another namespace).
All in all even if I can often argue with andreas I like his design (may be I'm wrong). I like the fact that there is no nesting. I prefer that design if I understand it correctly over macro like expansion as proned by goran (even if his solution was backward compatible). It is close to what we did with http://www.squeaksource.com/Namespace.html ( we did not have an export close if I remember correctly but were thinking about adding one). Now I would like to see where we defined them. Ideally I would put them on Package.
There is also this: http://gulik.pbwiki.com/Namespaces