Libraries and hierarchies

[Ketil Z. Malde]

"Simon Marlow" <simonmar@microsoft.com> writes:

> Graham Klyne writes:

>> Ummm... OK, let's see if I follow, by example.  It sounds a bit
>> like a Unix file tree, where new filesystems can be grafted
>> (mounted) at any point in the tree.

> Yes, that's a pretty good analogy.

Would it be reasonable to expect most packages to be grafted at the
root?  Or would they have a default grafting point?

It seems to me that if packages are a bit disciplined in their choice
of naming (i.e. modules in foo-1.2 are always Foo.something, possibly
even deeper), the only reason for user-defined grafting point would be
if a single program wanted to import modules from different versions
of the same package. 

-kzm
-- 
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants