On Mon, 08 Jan 2001  14:36:46 +0900, Dave Thomas wrote:
[snip]
> Not better, but perhaps additional.
> 
> Should a library's version information also be used to record
> dependencies?
> 
>    module Wombat
> 
>      Version "1.2.3" {
>         requires "marsupial"               # no qualifier means any version
>         requires "eucalyptus" :> "1.0"     # at least this version
                                ^^
				:>=

>         requires "sleep" :> "0.9" :< "1.5" # in range
>         requires "skippy" "5.4"            # exact (same as :== "5.4")

It might be more intuitive to use the operator-less notation to denote
"at least", see [ruby-talk:5613]. This seems to me to be the most
common usage; a script requires x.y, and doesn't care if fix x.y.1 is
present. Ruby could warn before loading libs with major number
increments, as the interface will probably have changed. A common
versioning system would help a lot here.

[snip]
> Looks scary, but it puts all the dependency stuff in one place, which
> will greatly help in the grand unified library project (gulp).

Agreed.

	Michel