[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Libraries organized by category
- To: srfi-84@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Libraries organized by category
- From: Andrew Wilcox <awilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:18:56 -0500
- Delivered-to: srfi-84@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=DddhwdE+GpAnOBmR5dNNpFUYc2MlJkMzFZ/XlW4wLWiWqLGlNqCNbCUKZYDikjD8RdoN+eUdXJuPOrgwd1kHwLaQ8Vl5YYibolYcfXV6Rx0CHAflYcbUA4EcMikqHMTL/gl2Xjk/Dsy8M7kSQQgJiG9Kl7Q2Xa/9QYimAf5CCkA=
- Sender: andrew.wilcox@xxxxxxxxx
Neil Van Dyke writes:
> I think taxonomies for classifying libraries for human location are
> (or should be) more ephemeral than the universal identifiers of the
> libraries themselves.
I think you're right about that.
The only disadvantage I can think of for having a flatter structure is
that perhaps there might be more conflicts with people wanting the
same name for their library.
If the name of the Spiffy web server is "web:server:spiffy", then
someone else can have a Spiffy graphics drawing library if they want
I agree with you that a more hierarchical or taxonomy based naming
scheme will probably result in a greater number of name changes over
I expect some amount of library name changes is inevitable.
Library name changes might not be a problem to the extent we can avoid
reusing the old name.
If I decide to change the name of my library, perhaps I could release
a version of the library under the new name and a version under the
old name which forwards imports to the new library name:
;; forward old to new
(library andrewwilcox.name::neato r6rs
(export a b c d e f ...))
If something like this would be a workable solution, and library name
changes were not a big deal, then perhaps the cost of an increased
number of library names changes due to using a hierarchical taxonomic
structure would be ameliorated.