[Cuis-dev] Naming conventions

Tue Apr 28 02:32:16 PDT 2020

Thanks, Erik,
I suppose that was the reason, but the end result is just is a bit ugly,
from my point of view.
I remember Cincom (or, probably was ParcPlace that started the work) did a
hard work implementing
Namespaces in VW, but there the dot is a separator so MyNamestace.MyClass
looks better than
MyNamespace@#MyClass.
Another question is portability..
But I'm just thinking aloud :)

giorgio

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:18 AM Erik Stel <erik.stel at gmail.com> wrote:

> Giorgo,
>
> The dot is the statement separator in Smalltalk. What Juan suggest is
> regular Smalltalk. The @ message is sent to the Smalltalk instance and it
> will answer the package reference by the argument (a Symbol like
> #MyPackage). The package has also an implementation for the message @ and
> will answer a class. So everything is just executed and no special compiler
> handling.
>
> Cheers
> Erik
>
> (Sent from mobile device, please excuse typos and brevity)
>
> On 28 Apr 2020, at 10:08, giorgio ferraris <giorgio.ferraris at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 
> Hi, Juan,
>
> probably there is something that makes it faster using what you propose,
> but a general convention between languages is a dot as a separator for
> namespaces. VW is adopting this. (and BTW it seems more elegant too...) .
> Any case, I just started tasting Cuis water, and I have to say that, after
> the first moment of confusion (starting with git seems not natural for an
> old smalltalk programmer...) , I begin to appreciate the work you did in
> these years.
> ciao
> giorgio
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:19 PM Juan Vuletich <juan at jvuletich.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> On 4/27/2020 12:52 PM, Luciano Notarfrancesco via Cuis-dev wrote:
>>
>> I also dislike prefixes a lot. But fortunately name clashes are less
>> common in Cuis because there are not as many classes as in Pharo.
>> Personally, I’d love to have namespaces, or have class names be local to a
>> package.
>>
>>
>> Ok, this got me thinking. So, what would it take to do just that?
>>
>> We could make each package be a namespace. That means that classes that
>> are defined in a package will not be globals. But, any package declaring a
>> prerequisite would also behave as if in Python you did 'From package import
>> *'. So, the compiler would know that it is compiling some code for some
>> package, and it would try to find class names in all packages that were
>> declared as prerequisites.
>>
>> This would have the added benefit that the compiler would check for you
>> that you actually declared prerequisites. Code not in a package would not
>> have access to classes defined at any package.
>>
>> Usually, there would be no need to specify namespaces when accessing
>> 'globals', even if they belong in a different package/namespace. Just
>> declaring the prerequisites for your package just once, will do. The only
>> case where explicit call for a namespace would be needed, is if you ask two
>> prerequisites, they both define classes with the same name, and there is
>> ambiguity. In such casses something like:
>> a := `Smalltalk@#PackageName1@#ClassName` new.
>> b := `Smalltalk@#PackageName2@#ClassName` new.
>> would work as expected. See that class resolution is done at compile time
>> because of the use of backticks. So there's no performance penalty. Also,
>> there's no new syntax!
>>
>> If we add package names to the Smalltlak global namespace, then we could
>> also do:
>> a := `PackageName1@#ClassName` new.
>> b := `PackageName2@#ClassName` new.
>>
>> Again, this is only when the case is that you decided to depend on two
>> different packages that happen to clash. So, you are already aware of the
>> situation. This would never get in your way when good old Smalltalk would
>> do!
>>
>> There's some work to be done in Browsers and other tools, but I feel it
>> is not too much...
>>
>> Also note that I'd not include nested namespaces, just like we don't have
>> nested packages. I'd also avoid having namespaces as a separate thing from
>> packages. I'd have a single concept for both. So, it would be simpler than
>> what is available in other Smalltalks that support namespaces.
>>
>> Does this make sense? I am missing something?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Juan Vuletichwww.cuis-smalltalk.orghttps://github.com/Cuis-Smalltalk/Cuis-Smalltalk-Devhttps://github.com/jvuletichhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/juan-vuletich-75611b3
>> @JuanVuletich
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 10:46 PM, giorgio ferraris via Cuis-dev <
>> cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>> prefixes have a long story, in use also on  VisualSmalltalk or
>>> SmalltalkV long, long time ago. Not having namespaces on many Smalltalk
>>> dialects makes prefix the only (ugly) solution.
>>> The resulting names are horrible, I personally dislike it a lot, but
>>> class' names clashing is something that could easily happens.
>>>
>>> ciao
>>>
>>> giorgio
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 5:34 PM Erik Stel via Cuis-dev <
>>> cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Ken,
>>>>
>>>> I think you just answered my question ;-).
>>>>
>>>> It can indeed be a Pharo ’thing’. In Pharo (default image) you have
>>>> class names like ’ZnWebSocket’. It represents a WebSocket and comes from
>>>> the ‘Zinc’ framework. I think it coexisted with WebSocket for some time
>>>> (the later is no longer part of the default Pharo image). Also ‘MCPackage’
>>>> is a package from Monticello (the versioning system). A full name like
>>>> ‘MonticelloPackage’ would have solved that issue of name conflict I suppose.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Erik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On 27 Apr 2020, at 17:13, ken.dickey at whidbey.com wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > On 2020-04-27 07:28, Erik Stel via Cuis-dev wrote:
>>>> >> Hi,
>>>> >> Short question:
>>>> >> Also using Pharo, I’m used to creating classes with prefixed names
>>>> >> because of possible name collisions. What is the Cuis take on these
>>>> >> prefixes? I do not see any prefixes being used in the
>>>> >> packages/features I’m using at the moment.
>>>> >> Regards,
>>>> >> Erik
>>>> >
>>>> > Examples?
>>>> >
>>>> > What is the context?
>>>> >
>>>> > Not being a Pharo user, I have no idea what you are talking about.
>>>> >
>>>> > Typically, one wants to use meaningful names in a way that orients
>>>> one and makes code reads like sentences.
>>>> >
>>>> > Note that the base Cuis image typically has between 500 and 600
>>>> classes.  The latest Pharo base image has over 9000 classes.  Perhaps the
>>>> (pre)fix is for a Pharo problem..
>>>> >
>>>> > -KenD
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cuis-dev mailing list
>>>> Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st
>>>> https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Cuis-dev mailing list
>>> Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st
>>> https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev
>>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20200428/191079d2/attachment-0001.htm>