Package namespace absolute or relative

[Harald Oehlmann]

Dear TCL'ers,

a package file: "mypackage.tcl" contains the tcl package "mypackage".

Is it wise/correct to use absolute namespace or relative namespace
within package, e.g. preceed the namespace with "::".

Example with relative namespace:

package provide mypackage 1.0
namespace eval mypackage {
variable myvar 1
}
proc mypackage::myproc {args} {
variable myvar
...
}

Example with absolute namespace:

package provide mypackage 1.0
namespace eval ::mypackage {
variable myvar 1
}
proc ::mypackage::myproc {args} {
variable myvar
...
}

What are the implications of each choice ?

Thank you,
Harald

[Ashok]

Harald,

I've asked myself the same question before. I like the idea of loading
under a namespace that can be controlled by the caller. The issue I have
is that other packages that also make use of the functionality then do
not know how to invoke those commands.

For example, if the sha package is loaded under ::myapp::sha namespace,
then the pki package which may also make use of that functionality does
not really know it needs to call ::myapp::sha::sha1.

So currently I prefer to always start with the global namespace.

/Ashok

[Harald Oehlmann]

Ashok,

thank you for your thoughts. This is higly appreciated. And I am happy
that I am not alone ;-)

So this is a clear +1 for "::namespace".

Thank you,
Harald

[Gerald Lester]

I go for absolute namespace, for the reasons Ashok stated.

IF we had a way to state that a package could be loaded multiple times
or maybe once per namespace -- then maybe I'd go with relative namespaces.

--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Gerald W. Lester, President, KNG Consulting LLC |
| Email: Gerald...@kng-consulting.net |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+