DWT package mapping?

aarti_pl aarti at interia.pl
Tue Oct 21 13:27:18 PDT 2008

Frank Benoit pisze:
> At the moment there are these mappings
> org.eclipse.swt -> dwt
> org.eclipse     -> dwtx
> Symbols:
> SWT             -> DWT
> SWTError        -> DWTError
> SWTException    -> DWTException
> ....
> But there are more candidates for the dwt project.
> com.novocode    -> ??
> com.ibm.icu     -> ??
> org.osgi        -> ??
> Where to put them?
> And the rule for renaming should be consistent and open to new packages.
> But why do renaming anyway? Is it really that hard to type? Can IDEs and
> collective imports help?
> What also is bad about the renaming, is that it must be done all over
> again. That is time consuming when preparing Java source.
> So I think... What about changing all the renaming back to the original?
> Would that work? What do you think?

I generally prefer shorter names. They are simpler and nicer IMHO. I 
would say that it is C++ way of naming packages, and this way is working 
quite good. Very deep hierarchies e.g. make me crazy when I have to get 
to file with file manager. Fortunately problem with deep directory 
hierarchy can be solved using good IDE.

Saying all above I also think that it is much more important for D to 
have more libraries translated from Java, than to change artificially 
names of packages just to get nicer names. Also keeping same names as in 
original library allows for easier porting snippets/pieces of code from 

So if it makes problems to change original names to D specific names, I 
think that original names should be retained.

Marcin Kuszczak

More information about the Digitalmars-d-dwt mailing list