[swift-evolution] [Discussion] Namespaces

[Matthew Johnson]

> On May 20, 2016, at 10:43 AM, Robert Schwalbe via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
>> Anyway, I'm +1 for namespaces everywhere, some names can be common. For example Node could be related to trees, physics engines and all sorts of constructs. "Node" may be a perfectly fine name for these. That said, these are sometimes tied to specific types in which case nesting them may make more sense, which I believe is already being addressed (currently we can't nest generic types)? It's certainly not as simple as it can appear!
> 
> Absolutely +1 for namespaces.
> 
> Even if you despise the concept of namespaces that seems like that can be addressed by a project and/or company style guide that explicitly forbids their use.
> 
> For the people/projects that would embrace namespaces, namespaces would be a godsend.
> 
> Sure, you can probably pull all kind of stunts to simulate namespaces, but besides creating additional  work for the Swift team (and I do not say nor take that lightly), they really need to be supported and implemented at the language/syntax level for first class citizenry.

What benefit do namespaces provide that submodules would not?

> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution