17 Jun
2009
17 Jun
'09
9:29 a.m.
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Wolfgang Jeltsch <g9ks157k@acme.softbase.org> wrote:
The Yampa people and I (the Grapefruit maintainer) already agreed to introduce a top-level FRP namespace instead of putting FRP under Control or whatever.
The problem with a top-level namespace like FRP is that it is a cryptic acronym: it means nothing to a novice, and may be easily confused with other acronyms by an expert. I believe top-level names should _at_the_ _very_least_ be minimally descriptive of the category of things that live in it.
So, I'd be fine with Control.Reactive.FRP, Control.Reactive.Yampa, etc, or even just Reactive.Yampa etc.
Besides, it hardly seems necessary to emphasize "Functional" and "Programming" in the Haskell context...