<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/8/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Daniel Goertzen</b> <<a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
That starts to strongly resemble the way C++ namespaces work.<br><br>Using the mnesia app as an example, the app source files are well<br>decomposed into their functional areas, for example: mnesia_subscr.erl,<br>mnesia_controller.erl, mnesia_checkpoint.erl, etc. But the entire API
<br>for mnesia is really exported through the module "mnesia", and<br>mnesia.erl contains lots of functions that just relay calls to other<br>modules. Wouldn't it make more sense for each of the files (ex,<br>mnesia_subscr.erl) to be able to directly export bits and pieces into
<br>the mnesia module/namespace?<br><br>And this leads to the question of nested modules like C++ nested<br>namespaces. I've found that nested namespaces in C++ have helped me<br>keep names short and natural and remove concern over collisions.
<br>Consider this erlang example:<br><br>Erlang makes me name stuff like this...<br><br>myapp:foo_dostuff(...)<br>myapp:bar_dostuff(...)<br><br><br>When I'd really like to say it like this...<br><br>myapp:foo:dostuff(...)
<br>myapp:bar:dostuff(...)<br><br><br>Disclaimer: I've written large c++ programs, but not any large elrang<br>programs yet. Please correct me if I've missed out on some erlang feature.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Dan.</blockquote>
<div><br><br>I can see where this would be useful.<br>What about the X.X notation (e.g. in erlsoap)?<br><br></div><br></div><br>