Changes between Version 49 and Version 50 of Records/NameSpacing


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Apr 29, 2013 12:22:58 PM (12 months ago)
Author:
simonpj
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Records/NameSpacing

    v49 v50  
    4141== Agda: A case for why name-spacing alone is a good enough solution == 
    4242 
    43  * You can use a type synonym to abbreviate the namespace part (as 
    44 shown above.) 
    45  * If there's no ambiguity you don't need to use a namespace (e.g. you 
    46 can use 'a' instead of 'Record.a'). 
    47  * The namespace name is predictable (e.g. <Typename>.<fieldname>) 
    48 while ad-hoc prefixes tend to use different conventions e.g. the whole 
    49 record name (e.g. 'recordA') or some abbreviation thereof (e.g. 
    50 'rcrdA'.) 
     43 * You can use a type synonym to abbreviate the namespace part (as shown above.) 
     44 * If there's no ambiguity you don't need to use a namespace (e.g. you can use 'a' instead of 'Record.a'). 
     45 * The namespace name is predictable (e.g. <Typename>.<fieldname>) while ad-hoc prefixes tend to use different conventions e.g. the whole record name (e.g. 'recordA') or some abbreviation thereof (e.g. 'rcrdA'.) 
    5146 
    5247The main argument for this approach is its simplicity; it's simple to