Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote on 11/30/2014 10:55 AM:
Another example where this happens (and in a way that couldn't be fixed by combining packages) is with typed versions of libraries. If I release a package with the collection `foo`, and then someone else produces a typed version of it, that will probably be named either `foo/typed` (and thus be in the `foo` namespace) or `typed/foo` (and thus be in the `typed` namespace).
Personally, I'd much rather have packages respect namespace boundaries, and have a simpler model, and let people call that TR library `foo-typed` or `typed-foo`. (Or, TR comes up with a better scheme for providing TR and non-TR interfaces to a module, and reduces DRY problems in specifying APIs at the same time.)
Neil V. _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
