Very happy with that approach.
(Although age can become an issue.)
R.E. Boss
-Original Message-
From: Programming On Behalf Of Eric
Iverson
Sent: vrijdag 17 september 2021 16:46
To: Programming forum
Subject: [Jprogramming] language changes - self effacing
Michal,
Your comment
It seems to me that the biggest constraints on locale names are the
word formation rules and parsing rules. Though there's also some name
length issues (longer names are less likely to experience collisions,
but can become unwieldy).
For example, perhaps we would want to have locales which can onl
There is (and never has been) a requirement to publish through Jsoftware.
I was just pointing out that having a prefix, such as your 3 initials or
company name, would avoid many potential name conflicts.
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 2:50 PM Michal Wallace
wrote:
> Well, at least part of why it's wor
Using the current facilities you can do
cocurrent PREFIX,'widget'
Would that suffice?
Henry Rich
On 9/17/2021 2:49 PM, Michal Wallace wrote:
Well, at least part of why it's worked fine so far is because anyone
who created a package had to go through jsoftware to publish it...
As more people
Well, at least part of why it's worked fine so far is because anyone
who created a package had to go through jsoftware to publish it...
As more people start to share j packages on github, there's a
greater chance of running into naming conflicts.
(... And also version dependency conflicts.)
On
When I first designed/implemented locales, I fully expected that it would
be revisited at some point along the lines you suggest. But the flat
structure with copath has proven more resilient than expected.
I look forward to suggestions in this area. But we want to keep it simple.
A dead simple sc
very glad to hear this!
I think "big footprint" is what I was really getting at.
Looking at my own code, I tend to use these "accessors" a lot more often in
explicit code than in tacit.
I still think there's a good idea there, but I now think it could be
handled better with a verb-creating librar
Forthright yet diplomatic. Thanks for doing that.
hhr
On 9/17/2021 10:45 AM, Eric Iverson wrote:
Michal,
Your comment: "what's up with this new `name::` syntax?"
stirred up interesting stuff.
The change was in a beta, so was intended to promote discussion.
Henry's response: "Possession is n
Michal,
Your comment: "what's up with this new `name::` syntax?"
stirred up interesting stuff.
The change was in a beta, so was intended to promote discussion.
Henry's response: "Possession is nine points of the law. :)"
did have a smile, was a simple fact, and should absolutely not be taken to
