Since this whole topic is rather hard to think about (I constantly find myself thinking in circles, anyway), could I ask you to elaborate on the scheme you had in mind? same here :-) ergh, now that i understand your proposal better this is
hi, Simon Marlow wrote: probably not very relevant. i was thinking that there is no essential difference between the issue of unique module names, and unique package names, as one can always make the package name part of the module name. however, simon pj pointed out (and i agree) that the package name may be quite ugly (i.e. include versioning etc) and it would be nicer if they are not visibale in source code. bye iavor -- ================================================== | Iavor S. Diatchki, Ph.D. student | | Department of Computer Science and Engineering | | School of OGI at OHSU | | http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~diatchki | ==================================================