Hi,
AndrevanTonder <andre at het.brown.edu> writes:
> - (6.7) "Using compound compound names ...", is perhaps more true
> than the editors intended. Also, a spell check of the rest of the
> document might be useful ;-)
>
> - (6.7) "Versioning, in particular, is natural in list form, but awkward
> in encoded form." - This is the only rationale mentioned in favour of
> compound names. However, it is clear what versioning as lists has
> nothing to do with library names as lists, and should be removed from
> this section. So effectively there is no rationale for list
> library names left.
I had that impression too.
I think one good rationale for list library names are that (i) they are
more readable and more easily processed than strings with an ad hoc
syntax and (ii) hierarchical naming facilitates the mapping of library
names to file names (FWIW, Guile's module system works like this [0]).
Thanks,
Ludovic.
[0]
http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Writing-new-Modules.html
Received on Wed Jun 27 2007 - 03:57:39 UTC