[Nitro] A Facets Namespace?
george.moschovitis at gmail.com
Fri Jun 2 12:20:57 EDT 2006
Core classes changes should remain in the top level namespace.
PS: but perhaps there is no need for changes and should probably leave
the classes in the top level namespace as they are now. If we see
problems in the future we can change this.
On 6/2/06, George Moschovitis <george.moschovitis at gmail.com> wrote:
> I would suggest going the Glue way, ie use a namespace (Facets) but
> include in the default namespace ;-)
> On 6/2/06, TRANS <transfire at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Should all Facets' classes and modules be wrapped in a Facets namespace?
> > I've considered but haven't gone that route fro a few reasons.
> > 1) Some modules seem so basic as to be fitting the toplevel.
> > 2) Some facets create extensions to core/standard. Does it make sense
> > to encapsulate classes/modules in a "brand" namespaces when aspects of
> > them effect other toplevel modules and classes?
> > 3) I have a working model of requiring into. That method is currently
> > defined in roll.rb but I can add it to Facets. The question is, is it
> > robust enough?
> > Other considerations?
> > T.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nitro-general mailing list
> > Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general
More information about the Nitro-general