The problem with that is that there is no way to ensure that there is only one package named "data/red-black-tree" and there can be two mutually incompatible universes of packages for Carl's rbts and mine, for instance. Furthermore, it has the internal linking problem.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: > Yesterday, Jay McCarthy wrote: >> Planet attempts to solve this problem technically by (a) having all >> collections be prefixed by <author>/<package-name> and (b) mandating >> a centralized server that enforces unique <author>s and unique >> <package-name>s per author. Since Racket packages don't have a >> mandated central server we can't enforce uniqueness like that. (i.e. >> even if we mandated the prefix by <package-name>, there's no way to >> enforce unique package names across the universe without a central >> server.) Furthermore, bringing <package-name>s in to the code would >> give us /internal linking/ which Racket packages are designed to >> avoid for other reasons. >> >> Since technical solutions to this problem are lacking, > > An easy way to make it a non problem would be to eliminate the extra > indirection that is in package names: if the package that Carl is > asking about is *named* "data/red-black-tree" then it clearly > conflicts with another package with the same name. > > -- > ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: > http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! -- Jay McCarthy <j...@cs.byu.edu> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93 _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev