3 ms·
> I like your gem otherwise, but it's called "emoji", implying that it's the Ruby library for handling those characters. That's not the first time I've encount
by rcfox 12y ago
> I like your gem otherwise, but it's called "emoji", implying that it's the Ruby library for handling those characters.
That's not the first time I've encountered this assumption. I can believe that it makes sense, if you're will to willing to play the part of the layman user: "I want emojis, so I'll just do: gem install emoji"
However, I don't think it's too unreasonable for people with some basic level of experience to understand that there's no central authority granting library names. If it were a core library that came with the interpreter, sure, it's fair to expect that that is the library you're supposed to use. When you get into community-sourced libraries, names are just granted on a first-come, first-served basis for whatever service is hosting them.
- trvz 12y ago> When you get into community-sourced libraries, names are just granted on a first-come, first-served basis for whatever service is hosting them. Maybe they shouldn't be. I dislike Apache being called httpd in yum, as compared to apache2 in apt. I can see how a package called markdown wouldn't be a port of the original, but CommonMark, and that would be misleading, too. If a package managing system doesn't care, it loses some pride in my eye.
- leoc 12y agoThe lack of a central authority for names hardly absolve individual library creators/maintainers of the responsibility to choose appropriate names; closer to the opposite, surely.