On May 14, 2004 12:30 pm, Mark Stosberg wrote: > On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 03:17:50PM -0400, _brian_d_foy wrote: > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael A Nachbaur > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The thing is, these are free-standing applications, and for the most > > > part aren't developer tools. So, I was thinking an App:: namespace > > > would work well, (e.g.. App::WWW::NachoMusic, etc). > > > > I'd rather see top-level namespaces for complete applications. I don't > > think the App::* adds any information. :) > > I would imagine that you meant to qualify this statement with an > assumption that the applications have decently unique names, and not > generic ones that might look like an existing standard use of a > top-level domain (CGI, HTML, Data, WWW, etc).
I agree to that. There can be many instances where you have non-intuitive names, or redundant names. Also, using different top-level namespaces can help to categorize the type of application, making it easier for someone to find what they're looking for. "Gee, I'd like a web-based MP3 player" (App::Media::WWW::), or "I need to provision cable modems using a barcode scanner." (App::Business::Internet::) -- Michael A. Nachbaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://nachbaur.com/pgpkey.asc
