From: mathew <meta@...>
Date: 2005-09-27T10:12:50+09:00
Subject: Re: Require Namepaces and RubyGems' effect on LoadPath problem

TRANS wrote:

>On 9/26/05, Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>>In doing so it reduces "dependencies" in lib files. What I mean by
>>>that is I don't have to specify absolute paths in internal lib files.
>>>      
>>>
>>If the purpose is less typing, I see even less value.
>>    
>>
>
>No, it independence from absolutes. WHy does XML have namespaces? Same thing.
>  
>

XML has namespaces so that there can be multiple elements with the same 
base name. Ruby 'require' already supports that--you can have require 
'foo/set.rb' and require 'bar/set.rb', the same way you can have 
<foo:set> and <bar:set>.

I still don't understand how this namespace proposal improves things, 
other than to reduce typing. Can you give an example?

>But that's the point. I'd rather not maintain a single directory with
>100+ files? No, I'd rather break them up into some reasonable
>categories, even though I want the end user to be able access them
>through one interface.
>

What's wrong with having a file  mylib/integer.rb  which simply consists of

require 'mylib/system/byte.rb'
require 'mylib/system/word.rb'
require 'mylib/special/prime.rb'
require 'mylib/positive.rb'
require 'mylib/negative.rb'

and so on?


mathew