From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2010-10-25T20:55:45+09:00
Subject: Re: Placing new names under standard namespaces?

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Ammar Ali <ammarabuali@gmail.com> wrote:
> Someone recently pointed out that placing new classes and modules
> under standard library namespaces, like Time::Tree or
> Hash::Transforms, is frowned upon.
>
> I find this approach increases readability and keeps related things
> nicely organized. At the same time I understand that there is a
> (slight?) risk of name collisions.
>
> I'm curious what others think, and if there are other risks to be considered.

I can see both positions: changing built in / std lib classes is
typically considered dangerous and a don't.  OTOH if you create
extensions e.g. for class Time which are universal (i.e. multiple
users of Time can benefit from this) nesting might not be a too bad
idea.  I'd be cautious though.

Kind regards

robert

-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/