1. New namespace keyword
With Matt clarifying that namespaces are used optionally, I think the new
namespace keyword makes a lot of sense. For instance:
---- greeter.e
namespace greeter
global function hello()
-- code
end function
---- myprog.e
include greeter.e
greeter:hello() -- works
hello() -- works
include greeter.e as g
g:hello() -- works
Matt,
How difficult of a change to the code do you think this is?
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
2. Re: New namespace keyword
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> With Matt clarifying that namespaces are used optionally, I think the new
> namespace
> keyword makes a lot of sense. For instance:
<snip>
> How difficult of a change to the code do you think this is?
Not too difficult, but I think we need to explore this idea some more to make
sure that it makes sense, first.
Matt
3. Re: New namespace keyword
- Posted by Jeremy Cowgar <jeremy at cowg?r?com>
Apr 28, 2008
-
Last edited Apr 29, 2008
Matt Lewis wrote:
>
> > How difficult of a change to the code do you think this is?
>
> Not too difficult, but I think we need to explore this idea some more to make
> sure that it makes sense, first.
>
Matt, how do we proceed?
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
4. Re: New namespace keyword
- Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at ?m?il.com>
Apr 28, 2008
-
Last edited Apr 29, 2008
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> Matt Lewis wrote:
> >
> > > How difficult of a change to the code do you think this is?
> >
> > Not too difficult, but I think we need to explore this idea some more to
> > make
> > sure that it makes sense, first.
> >
>
> Matt, how do we proceed?
I think we need to take the pro argument, and make sure that it really is
a pro. Would it really be beneficial to have these 'automatic' namespaces?
We also need to think about ways that it could fail. What happens if two
files use the same default? what if you include two different versions of
the same file? What if the default namespace is explicitly assigned to
something else?
Matt
