[fpc-pascal] Re: [Bulk] Re: Namespaces Support

leledumbo leledumbo_cool at yahoo.co.id
Tue Nov 5 16:10:21 CET 2013

> The packages are defined using directories. Is Java a mess too? 

Yes, exactly, that's what makes Java package system messy. It makes refactoring (or restructurization) extremely difficult for deep package hierarchy.

On Tuesday, November 5, 2013 6:37 PM, Marcos Douglas [via Free Pascal - General] <ml-node+s1045716n5717420h82 at n5.nabble.com> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Dmitry Boyarintsev 
><[hidden email]> wrote: 
>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Marcos Douglas <[hidden email]> wrote: 
>>> Sorry, but this is boring. 
>>> Do you not agree that is much better propose a solution to be possible 
>>> to use two -- or more -- units that have the same name but works 
>>> together at the same project? 
>> Thought process is a boring thing in nature - it supposed to exhaust brain. 
>> I definitely disagree on benefit of that. Since it opens door not bring a 
>> unit name from a source to command-line. 
>> You'll have a project of 10 Classes.pas and you'll define their actual name 
>> in command line: 
>> fpc -ALIAS/graphics/classes.pas Graphics -ALIAS/audio/classes.pas audio 
>> -ALIAS/math/classes.pas 
>> On another project the same unit, might get another alias: 
>> fpc -ALIAS/graphics/classes.pas Graph -ALIAS/audio/classes.pas sounds 
>But in Java we have the "same" feature. A project can point to 
>com.company.foo.lib.MyClass but another project can use only 
>The packages are defined using directories. Is Java a mess too? 
>IMHO, my proposal is more flexible than Java because we won't have a 
>"hard code" for path like Java does. Only the compiler will know about 
>it, not the sources. 
>> So management of this kind of projects and libraries turns into a funny 
>> process. 
>The big difference is that we are talking about our projects, not 
>3rd-party libraries. 
>You -- or the company where you works -- will decide what names will 
>be better than others, etc. 
>> From that point of view name spaces (as they're declared in sources) becomes 
>> far more predictable. 
>> But again, back to namespaces, why people couldn't use underscores "_"? The 
>> same domain pattern: 
>> "org_douglas_marcos_classes.pas" 
>> "org_mse_classes.pas" 
>> With Delphi 2 the 8.3 file name limitation was removed and everybody could 
>> start growing their domain libraries. 
>We back again... The name collision continues! 
>The problem is: We do not know all names used around the world. 
>> Ok, nevermind. From what I see the biggest issue is linking and I guess RTTI 
>> (eventually) 
>I don't think so. Even the names of the units could be changed "on 
>demand" by the compiler, using the ALIAS defined before. The linker 
>would remain the same, without changes. 
>Best regards, 
>Marcos Douglas 
>fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email] 
>If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Namespaces-Support-tp5717153p5717420.html 
>To unsubscribe from Namespaces Support, click here.

View this message in context: http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Namespaces-Support-tp5717153p5717421.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-pascal/attachments/20131105/2101d1bb/attachment.html>

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list