On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 12:58 +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> Derick Eddington <[email protected]> writes:

> > I don't think we need to consolidate pathname and include libraries in
> > order to make collections like the proposed (ported ---) one.  
> >
> I'm not sure I agree: I don't envision a single (ported ...) collection
> (i.e. a single "package" in dorodango-speak), but multiple packages that
> share the (ported ...) namespace. E.g. there will be a foof-loop
> package, a fmt package, an as-match package, etc. 

Right, that's what I thought was envisioned.  

> In that vein, having a
> package providing an `include-file' macro would make sense, as it each
> package of ported code is very likely to need this functionality.

I was imagining a (ported private include) library which the separate
packages depend on.

> > Such collection will be using such functionality privately and it can
> > be changed in the future without affecting public use of the
> > collection.  Some basic pathname and include functionality for private
> > use is very easy to make, so I don't think the (ported ---) collection
> > should be held-up waiting for us to attempt to design The Pathname and
> > Include Libraries Everything Should Use.
> >
> If there'd be only one collection (or package) for the ported code, I'd
> agree, but see above. 

There can be multiple packages which use an include library private to
the Ported project.

My main point was that because these (ported ---) libraries' usage of
include or pathname functionality is behind-the-scenes, you and I don't
need to focus on consolidating our personal libraries of such
functionality.  Let's see what continues to evolve in those areas, and
behind-the-scenes stuff can be changed without anyone except maintainers
noticing or caring.

> The package providing `include' doesn't need to
> expose a pathname interface as well, but should allow the user to
> specify the path to the included file (relative to the library search
> path) in a platform-independent way.

I agree.

-- 
: Derick
----------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to