[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The politics and other realities of names....

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 84 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 84 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Rather than establish our own authority we could try to leverage an
existing one, as Java does.  com.microsoft.foo.bar is reserved for the
owner of the microsoft.com DNS name.  This may not be the most
suitable level of entity for an authorization system.  The example
above could either refer to the foo.bar module of microsoft.com, or
the bar module of foo.microsoft.com, which for Microsoft Corporation
may not be such a problem, but for other hosts that conflict may be
unacceptable.  The naming is also not actually enforced by any of the
Java tools - nothing is stopping me from distributing my own
com.microsoft modules.
These are valid criticisms, but in practice they are not a problem. The domain-based naming system has the big advantage of being simple and good enough. It works well enough it practice.

Now consider that, unlike Java, we actually write reusable code, and
share modules with third parties.  So Acme.com may import Bob's List
But not over the net. You can't do that reliably in general or even usually, unless the library in question is from a stable well known place. "Versionitus" requires that testing needs to be done before you know your code works with the library.