Logan Capaldo wrote:
> 
> On Jun 2, 2006, at 6:26 AM, Minkoo Seo wrote:
> 
>> Thank you for the pointer and explanation.
>>
>> Does anybody know exact conclusion of the discussion
>> on ABC::load('abc-point') syntax?
>>
>> My memory is blurred, and if I remember correctly,
>> the suggestion was rejected because ABC::load syntax
>> does not anything but
>>
>> require 'abc-point'
>>
>> module ABC
>>   include abc-point
>> end
>>
>> and such an implementation is already there and trivial.
>>
>> And I am curious why namespace capability is not part of
>> Ruby language. Is there any standardized solution for
>> handling two 'Point' classes from two different company?
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Minkoo Seo
>>
>>
>> On 6/2/06, Victor Shepelev <vshepelev / imho.com.ua> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: gwtmp01 / mac.com [mailto:gwtmp01 / mac.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 1:53 AM
>>> > On Jun 1, 2006, at 6:20 PM, Matthew Smillie wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Jun 1, 2006, at 23:08, Minkoo Seo wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Okay, here's another example.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I have Point class provided by XYZ company.
>>> > >> I also have Point class provided by ABC company.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Now, I have to creates an instance of XYZ.Point from an
>>> > >> instance of ABC.Point. How can I solve this problem?
>>> > >> I have to mention ABC.Point and XYZ.Point in the same file.
>>> > >
>>> > > abc_point = ABC::Point.new
>>> > > xyz_point = XYZ::Point.new
>>> >
>>> > I think the OR was suggesting that company ABC and company XYZ
>>> > neglected to wrap their classes in a containing module/namespace so
>>> > you have two top level classes named Point.  I think at that point
>>> > you suggested politely to both ABC and XYZ that they should
>>> > distribute their code within a module.
> 
> I'm confused. In what language would these two companies putting their 
> code outside of a namespace declaration _not_ be a problem then? As far 
> as I can tell ruby provides as much namespace support as any other 
> language, and no language (AFAIK)has a way to make two top-level Point 
> classes work the right way if they aren't inside different namespaces.
Does it matter?  There's potentially a way to solve it in Ruby that 
doesn't involve changing the offending code.  What other languages do is 
hardly relevant.  In a way, Ruby provides much better namespace support 
than other languages, because it's actually feasible to change the 
namespace of code after the fact.

-- 
Alex