Hi, I do plan to write some haskell module specific to mandriva software or specification, for example a toolbox to parse the tree on mirror using media.cfg, or a tools to create rpm specfile following rpm scheme. Then I do plan to push thoses modules into hackage database, because I think it is the best way to have publicity, code review, bug report, etc... My question is related to namespace to use for such modules ? MDV.modules ? FOO.MDV.modules where FOO is an already existing namespace ? Also this question apply for more generic modules, eg which namespace should use an haskell RPM module ? Is it possible to create a new main namespace ? I think a FAQ is needed about this. Regards.
Hello Olivier, Wednesday, March 14, 2007, 11:27:45 PM, you wrote:
My question is related to namespace to use for such modules ? MDV.modules ? FOO.MDV.modules where FOO is an already existing namespace ?
Win32 package uses Graphics.Win32.* namespace and System.Win32 namespace while Unix package uses System.Posix namepsace. yfyi -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin@gmail.com
Olivier Thauvin
My question is related to namespace to use for such modules ? MDV.modules ? FOO.MDV.modules where FOO is an already existing namespace ?
If your modules are truly Mandriva-specific, then placing them in their own named hierarchy is ideal. But if there is even the slightest chance that they will be more widely useful, then it would be more appropriate to locate them in the hierarchy by their functionality, rather than their provenance. Please do not use cryptic abbreviations like MDV. You could use a reverse-domain-name scheme like in Java, e.g. Org.Mandriva.modules Com.Mandriva.modules or just plain Mandriva.modules If naming by functionality, then (depending on what your modules actually do), something like System.OS.Mandriva.modules
Also this question apply for more generic modules, eg which namespace should use an haskell RPM module ?
Perhaps System.OS.RPMtools
Is it possible to create a new main namespace ?
Yes, if you propose it on the libraries list and gain consensus.
I think a FAQ is needed about this.
http://www.haskell.org/hierarchical-modules/libraries/layout.html Regards, Malcolm
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
I think a FAQ is needed about this.
http://www.haskell.org/hierarchical-modules/libraries/layout.html
Just thought I should note that the above link is to a rather out-of-date document that I wrote when we were starting to plan and implement the hierarchical libraries. We recently removed this document from the GHC repository. Much of it isn't relevant now, but there are useful bits. Perhaps someone could start a new wiki page for library design guidelines and pull over relevant bits from this doc? Cheers, Simon
participants (4)
-
Bulat Ziganshin -
Malcolm Wallace -
Olivier Thauvin -
Simon Marlow