[racket-dev] PLaneT(2): Single vs multi-collection packages

Can't this be alleviated by the guidance on naming that the docs already
provide?

Sam
On Jun 6, 2013 2:30 PM, "Jay McCarthy" <jay.mccarthy at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth at ccs.neu.edu>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccarthy at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am *very* strongly in favor of this -- I'd rather have
> >>> single-collection packages than multi-collection packages, if forced
> >>> to choose. I'm very glad that you and Laurent have done the work here.
> >>
> >> The main problem with this is that it brings in internal linking where
> >> code directly refers to other packages (implementations) and not
> >> modules (interfaces) as the default. This means we will see code like
> >> (require jays-awesome-data-structure) rather than (require
> >> data/awesome). I think this is bad because it makes it harder to deal
> >> with forking, maintainers abandoning their code, splitting packages
> >> into packages that just depend on 'jays-awesome-data-structure, rather
> >> than implementing it internally, etc. Obviously you can still deal
> >> with those things, but if the path of evolution we imagine starts off
> >> with single-package-with-package/collection-name-shared, then most
> >> packaged collections will have a package as their name.
> >
> > First, I don't see why single-collection packages make things harder
> > to deal with re-implementing a package.  Imagine that I make
> > `disassemble` a single-collection package, and someone depends on it,
> > and then I abandon my code.  You can easily create a new package that
> > ships that collection.  I think that places the burden correctly --
> > it's easy to create packages initially, and handling abandoned
> > packages takes a little more work.  In JavaScript, where there's a
> > flat namespace, this works -- the Zepto library just provides the same
> > names as jQuery, even though they're different implementations and not
> > generic names.
>
> The problem is that if you use the name "samths-disassemble" then even
> in twenty years, my implementation uses the collection
> "samths-disassemble" and not "disassemble".
>
> Jay
>
>
> --
> Jay McCarthy <jay at cs.byu.edu>
> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University
> http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay
>
> "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/attachments/20130606/5f7285f9/attachment.html>