Re: Require Namepaces and RubyGems' effect on LoadPath problem

On 9/29/05, Austin Ziegler <[e-mail]> wrote:

> >>>> I still don't understand how this namespace proposal improves
> >>>> things, other than to reduce typing. Can you give an example?
> >>> I use it to organize a very large library. I've organized the lib
> >>> according to principles that make sense for development --in this
> >>> case it's a collection of general purpose libs so I've put classes
> >>> in one directory, modules in another, etc. But I don't want the end
> >>> user to have to "path down" so far, so the namespace allow all the
> >>> folders to be grouped together. So intead of:
> >> Then it may make more sense for you to reorganise your lib for
> >> development. Or maybe -- just maybe -- it's time to split nano and
> >> mega into different release collections.
> > Yea, right. You really just don't get it.
>
> I get it -- I also get that you're wanting to modify Ruby to match your
> view of Ruby ... which I don't think others view. Did you notice that
> *no one* has responded to your namespaces posts on ruby-talk? This
> really does seem to be something that exactly one person has a problem
> with. What additionally bothers me about this is that you first raised
> it in ruby-core before bothering to see if anyone *else* was having a
> similar problem on ruby-talk.

Okay Austin, whatever. I'm tired of trying to honestly explain things
to a person who only wants to tell others how much they suck. And how
he doesn't care about there's problems. It's pretty sad. The real
world is about HUMAN engineering problems. In reality there is no such
thing as a computer engineering problem --people who believe otherwise
generally expect others to do all sorts of arcane things and can't
understand why they don't --you know, like write a Rake task to
rearrange your lib before distribtion while substituting every require
line accordingly and placing in stub files for all files renamed or
deleted to give warning while documenting each file with endless ugly
{{{ }}}'s for there clever little dev tools....

I respect your work Austin. You're a smart guy. But you are too much a
Geek for your own good sometimes.

BTW, I'm not the only person thats ever thought about the "namespace"
problem with regards to Ruby:  [ruby-talk:21296]. And I am sure there
have been others.

Also, I raised it here first b/c if came into conflict with how
RubyGems' changes Ruby --I was pointing that out while seeing what
others thought of it. I did not expect much response on Ruby-talk but
I thought I'd try anyway -- there are a lot of Nubys there these days
--one wonders if its time for a second list (Yea, go ahead, tell me
thats a dumb idea too Austin. I know you want to.)

ciao,
T.