3 ms·
No one has mentioned that modules/packages hold together code that shares concepts. Surely getting rid of Java packages and keeping the classes would be far le
by dgreensp 15y ago
No one has mentioned that modules/packages hold together code that shares concepts.
Surely getting rid of Java packages and keeping the classes would be far less extreme than what Joe is suggesting for Erlang -- yet then we would have a zillion "meanings" of things like Image, Server, PDFFile, etc.
What about the Erlang functions that aren't "file2md5" and "downcase_char"? Is he way over-generalizing, or do Erlang programs typically just munge data in obvious ways?
- gnaritas 15y agoYou can package code without making the package a formal part of the namespace. Having a global namespace doesn't preclude packaging code, even if they are traditionally mixed as one thing. Many Smalltalk's have a single global namespace, it works pretty well.