From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2004-06-09T08:39:15+09:00
Subject: Re: Interfaces and semantics (or, how to hashpipe a duck)

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Sean O'Dell wrote:

> On Tuesday 08 June 2004 13:05, David A. Black wrote:
> > Hi --
> >
> > On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Sean O'Dell wrote:
> > > Probably wouldn't, but I just finished mine and it's released, and it's
> > > in C. I don't know what to do about the name clash.  I can't think of
> > > another name that works as well, and I have to move on to some actual
> > > work here.
> >
> > It's hard to think of a name that works *less* well, since this one
> > clashes with an already-available package.  I hope you'll consider
> > renaming it, as a courtesy to Dan and to reduce confusion by potential
> > users.
> 
> I will when I have a suitable alternative.

Since Interface is already the name of a Ruby library, pretty much any
other word (as long as it doesn't similarly shadow an existing
package) is automatically more suitable than Interface.  

"Interfaces" and "Interfacer" come to mind -- not plum names, perhaps,
but (as far as I know) unambiguous and unclaimed in Ruby-space.


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net


-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net