<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex;"><div style="word-wrap: break-word;" class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><p style="margin: 1.2em 0px !important;" class="">Consider the case where Erica has packages SwiftString, HTMLString, PGString, IBMString… These modules all have somewhat different dependencies — so you would not necessarily want to download and build all of them — but they do form a coherent whole under EricaString. Would this proposal allow for names like<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><code style="font-size: 0.85em; font-family: Consolas, Inconsolata, Courier, monospace; margin: 0px 0.15em; padding: 0px 0.3em; white-space: pre-wrap; border: 1px solid rgb(234, 234, 234); border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; display: inline; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);" class="">EricaString.Swift</code>,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><code style="font-size: 0.85em; font-family: Consolas, Inconsolata, Courier, monospace; margin: 0px 0.15em; padding: 0px 0.3em; white-space: pre-wrap; border: 1px solid rgb(234, 234, 234); border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; display: inline; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);" class="">EricaString.HTML</code><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>and<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><code style="font-size: 0.85em; font-family: Consolas, Inconsolata, Courier, monospace; margin: 0px 0.15em; padding: 0px 0.3em; white-space: pre-wrap; border: 1px solid rgb(234, 234, 234); border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; display: inline; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248);" class="">EricaString.IBM</code></p></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div style="word-wrap: break-word;" class=""><div class="">In the current system a package can contain multiple modules. But a module cannot have submodules.</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Does that allow us to refer to the names of modules qualified by their package name? It seems weird to not have hierarchical names for packages/modules (though I recognize these are not really the same thing, many languages/systems conflate the package namespace with the module namespace).</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">The current system does not allow Package name to be used as a namespace, unless it is a package of one module and that module uses the same name as the Package.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Not that I’m saying this wouldn’t be a good thing.</div></body></html>