For your specific example, I would do some combination of - Figure out why there are 2 GET-WAN-IPS helpers, how they differ, and factor to a single function. - Change GET-WAN-IP to a generic function and factor. - Create another package and factor.
The entire point of packages is to avoid name conflicts. So, if you are experiencing a name conflict in a single package, it's time to factor the code. Search the archives for a recent discussion on conflicts between packages, maybe that has some insight that is applicable to your issue. Good luck, Tom ---------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas M. Hermann Odonata Research LLC http://www.odonata-research.com/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/thomasmhermann On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Ryan Davis <r...@acceleration.net> wrote: > When working on a larger lisp code base, one with 10+ files in one > package, I begin to get nervous about accidental name conflicts, and was > wondering how other people deal with this. > > Here's the scenario I'm worried about: > > - dsl.lisp, written by a coworker two years ago, has a number of small > functions that are helpers for the main #'WRITE-DSL-REPORT function; one of > these helpers is #'GET-WAN-IPS > - nagios-config.lisp, written by me today, has a number of small > functions that are helpers for the main #'WRITE-NAGIOS-CONFIG function; one > of these helpers is #'GET-WAN-IPS > - I miss the compiler warning about redefining #'GET-WAN-IPS > - I test my code, it works in my REPL so I commit and call it a day > - Code eventually gets pushed to production and #'WRITE-DSL-REPORT is > broken > > It doesn't happen very often (and testing procedures usually catch stuff > before it goes to production), but it seems like there should be a nicer way > to deal with helper functions that you want to develop/test from the REPL, > but don't need to be used outside the current file. > > I had a few ideas to solve it, none of which I really like. I could add a > top-level FLET for the file, but the extra indentation will be annoying and > it'll be harder to test/maintain those helper functions. I could define a > helper package, per-file, and put my helper functions in that package (e.g. > (defun nagios-config-helpers::get-wan-ips ...)), but that feels funny and > awkward, which usually means it's a bad idea. I could break up my code into > many smaller packages, each exporting and importing the functions needed > elsewhere in the system, but that seems like recipe for dependency headaches > and a lot of unneeded paperwork. > > Do other people have this anxiety? Are there elegant ways to deal with it? > (besides medication and more unit testing) > > Thanks, > > -- > Ryan Davis > Acceleration.net > Director of Programming Services > 2831 NW 41st street, suite B > Gainesville, FL 32606 > > Office: 352-335-6500 x 124 > Fax: 352-335-6506 > > > _______________________________________________ > pro mailing list > pro@common-lisp.net > http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro > >
_______________________________________________ pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
