Forums

Cobra.Lang --> Cobra

General discussion about Cobra. Releases and general news will also be posted here.
Feel free to ask questions or just say "Hello".

Cobra.Lang --> Cobra

Postby Charles » Fri Aug 19, 2011 12:31 am

Do we need the "Lang" in Cobra? Java does it with "java.lang.foo" but I don't really see the point.

Sound off.
Charles
 
Posts: 2515
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Cobra.Lang --> Cobra

Postby hopscc » Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:52 am

Probably not if we're going to continue to drop everything (lang support, libs,..) into Cobra.Lang.

It may be useful to distinguish the Cobra pieces a bit more
Cobra.Internal - language support ( Cobra.Lang.Internal)
Cobra.Lib (say) Cobra RTL pieces
Cobra.Extn - cobra supplementary librarys (occasionally useful but not core)
hopscc
 
Posts: 632
Location: New Plymouth, Taranaki, New Zealand

Re: Cobra.Lang --> Cobra

Postby Charles » Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:47 pm

This still crosses my mind. Any protests?

I agree with Hops to some extent on the segregation but I think "Cobra.Extn" would actually be multiple "Cobra.Topic" libraries. Or those libraries could be hosted externally with their own project names which has already happened.

Items like CobraCore and various extension methods would still go in namespace "Cobra".
Charles
 
Posts: 2515
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Cobra.Lang --> Cobra

Postby hopscc » Thu Jul 12, 2012 8:15 am

go for it.
hopscc
 
Posts: 632
Location: New Plymouth, Taranaki, New Zealand

Re: Cobra.Lang --> Cobra

Postby Charles » Thu Jul 12, 2012 8:48 pm

hopscc wrote:go for it.

Sounds good. It occurs to me that we have a Cobra.Compiler.dll now. Perhaps the library should be distinguished after all. How does Cobra.Core.dll sound?
Charles
 
Posts: 2515
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Cobra.Lang --> Cobra

Postby hopscc » Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:10 am

Just for the compiler binary Library?
Think you want to still have 'Compiler'in its (file)name somewhere...

Re Cobra.Extn vs Cobra.Topic namespaces

I vaguely recollect that the idea here was that items in Cobra.Extn would be implicitly loaded ( as well as Cobra.Internal and Cobra.Lib)
whereas Cobra.Topic items had to be explicitly specified (used/ -ref'd) to be loaded to resolve a compilation.
The idea here was for things that are generally useful but not as commonly used as Core items ( or may be promoted to Core eventually)

Personally it was also for me ( or anyone capable of rebuilding the dll) to add things that I want or think should be in Core but havent been able to get that to happen yet...
( i.e a simple way of providing a branch capability sandbox).
hopscc
 
Posts: 632
Location: New Plymouth, Taranaki, New Zealand

Re: Cobra.Lang --> Cobra

Postby Charles » Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:22 pm

No, I meant the standard library would be Cobra.Core.dll and the current Cobra.Lang.Compiler.dll would become Cobra.Compiler.dll. Other libraries would be Cobra.Topic.dll.

I'm amenable to an env var COBRA_AUTO_REF that would allow one or more libs to be referenced and namespace used. This would allow you to augment your system or a server, and without even needing a Cobra workspace. If it's used then "cobra -v ..." should show it, of course.
Charles
 
Posts: 2515
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Return to Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

cron