[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Help-smalltalk] [patch] explain that namespaces and packages aren't rel

From: Stephen Compall
Subject: [Help-smalltalk] [patch] explain that namespaces and packages aren't related
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:48:26 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv: Gecko/20070802 SeaMonkey/1.1.4

Stephen wrote:
Note that, as with Common Lisp, the namespace
system is separate from the package loading system, so you still need to
load the package.
That is a key statement... I don't think I've seen that in the docs or at least not as clear as you've said it.

smalltalk--backstage--2.2--patch-56 also attached.

I'm not sure that saying it explicitly won't just encourage the unfortunate mental conflation of package loading and namespaces brought on by practice in certain other programming environments, though, so I may not be in favor of this patch.

;;; Stephen Compall ** **
But you know how reluctant paranormal phenomena are to reveal
themselves when skeptics are present. --Robert Sheaffer, SkI 9/2003
2007-09-04  Stephen Compall  <address@hidden>

        * doc/gst.texi: Explain that namespaces and packages are not
        related in the namespace documentation.

--- orig/doc/gst.texi
+++ mod/doc/gst.texi
@@ -1215,6 +1215,11 @@
     Namespace current: Smalltalk!
 @end example
+Loading a package, even with a @samp{namespace} option, will not
+``import'' the namespace; you must still refer to variables in the
+package as if you had simply filed in the code while in that namespace.
+Namespaces and packages are not related.
 Also remember that pool dictionaries are actually ``pool namespaces'',
 in the sense that including a namespace in a pool dictionaries list will
 automatically include its superspaces too. Declaring a namespace as a

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]