From: nobu@... Date: 2020-05-02T02:47:44+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:98108] [Ruby master Feature#16824] Follow RubyGems naming conventions for the stdlib Issue #16824 has been updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada). shevegen (Robert A. Heiler) wrote in #note-9: > The optionparser situation is indeed quite ... peculiar to me: > > require 'optparse' > OptionParser.new > > My brain has a hard time with it. I'd prefer: > > require 'optionparser' It has been available since 6 years ago, for your [Feature #9864]. ``` $ ruby -roptionparser -e 'ARGV.parse!' -- --help Usage: -e [options] ``` ---------------------------------------- Feature #16824: Follow RubyGems naming conventions for the stdlib https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16824#change-85345 * Author: shan (Shannon Skipper) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- It's been really nice that most gems these days follow the RubyGems naming convention, so you know exactly what to require just from seeing the gem name: https://guides.rubygems.org/name-your-gem/ I wonder if it would be possible to add aliases for parts of the stdlib that don't follow the convention for Ruby 3.0. I was thinking maybe shims like lib/optionparser.rb, which just does a require_relative of lib/optparse.rb. The following files are what I'd expect, given the namespaces. new file: file_utils.rb new file: getopt_long.rb new file: ip_addr.rb new file: open_struct.rb new file: open_uri.rb new file: option_parser.rb new file: p_store.rb new file: r_doc.rb new file: secure_random.rb new file: t_sort.rb new file: weak_ref.rb Eventually the old name could be the shim and new one actually contain the code on the path to deprecating old names in some future Ruby. Anyway, I just wanted to put the suggestion out there to adopt naming conventions for the stdlib as it's gemified. Ruby 3 seems like a nice time. :) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: