On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 02:47:49PM -0700, burtonator wrote:
>
> No. Just name it 'freenet' instead of 'Freenet'. There are some strong
> technical reasons why you should have packages as lowercase:
>
>
> A lot of Java developers (I am not one of them) will look at the "Freenet"
> package and instantly judge its source code quality just from the fact that it
> violates the bible - The Java Language Specification:
>
> http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/second_edition/html/names.doc.html#73307
I can't see people that make such superficial judgments being of much
use. And besides, there are plenty of _real_ flaws to find in the source
code ;>
> - ---
> Names of packages that are to be made widely available should be formed as
> described in ?7.7 . Such names are always qualified names whose first identifier
> consists of two or three lowercase letters that name an Internet domain, such as
> com, edu, gov, mil, net, org, or a two-letter ISO country code such as uk or
> jp. Here are examples of hypothetical unique names that might be formed under
> this convention:
>
> com.javasoft.jag.oak
> org.npr.pledge.driver
> uk.ac.city.rugby.game
>
> Names of packages intended only for local use should have a first identifier
> that begins with a lowercase letter, but that first identifier specifically
> should not be the identifier java; package names that start with the identifier
> java are reserved by Sun for naming Java platform packages.
> - ----
>
> When you start playing with reflection and dynamic class loading having a
> standard naming really helps make things clear. I think Freenet should benefit
> form this :)
Egads! Reflection and dynamic class loading! You maniac!
Hmm, can we incorporate it into the metadata standard?
--
# tavin cole
#
# "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect,
# a continual flight from wonder."
# - Albert Einstein
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
