|Subject:||Re: Emacs Lisp's future|
|Date:||Wed, 12 Oct 2016 01:55:09 +0800|
On 2016-10-11 10:54, Elias Mårtenson wrote:
> All of these tools have the problem that it's difficult to tell what
> part of a symbol is its "namespace". How do you tell the difference
> between the symbols "foo-bar" without a namespace, or "bar" with
> namespace "foo"?
Indeed. Have you had this problem in practice, though?
It's generally sufficient to look at the name of the file that declares that function. For example, gnu-apl-interactive-mode presumably lives in gnu-apl.el. If not, then you can set a file-local variable indicating what the library's prefix is.
> I guess I'm just curious as to why a separate symbol isn't used? :
> sounds good, and gnu-apl:interactive-mode would be much more clear.
> Automated tools would also be able to make more sense out of symbol
nameless uses ':' for display (and '::' for private members), indeed. Some packages use / (yas/, for example)
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|