DWT package mapping?

Frank Benoit keinfarbton at googlemail.com
Tue Oct 21 22:56:50 PDT 2008

John Reimer schrieb:
> Hello Frank,
>> 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?
> DWT really is SWT throughout.  Even the coding style is almost
> completely Java-like.  I think that the only reason it remains DWT is
> because of the original porting precedent that chose the name. :)
> It wouldn't bother me if DWT reverted back to the SWT name.  In fact,
> that probably makes a lot of sense. I'm guessing that it might even
> receive more recognition as a genuine SWT port from the SWT team and
> others if it were to revert to that name.
> BUT, I really really hope we don't adopt the long package names so
> typical of the Java realm.  "org.eclipse.*" prepended to the dwt
> namespace would be painful.  That's one Javaism that I hope stays away
> from D.  But, if there are some REALLY good reasons that the complete
> package names should be included, maybe I could be made to agree.  I'm
> not very enthusiastic about Java in general, so anything that reminds me
> too much of Java or causes me to forget that I'm actually using D (which
> is supposed to improve the programmer's life)... is not good.
> That's my opinion, anyway. :)
> -JJR

I was really not asking for renaming the DWT project. I think the name
is ok. DWT started as a SWT port but now, there is much more else.

Changing the Symbol DWT back to SWT, well i never liked to rename it. It
is the same reason i never wanted to rename jface to dface. The source
is ported, but it is still SWT. And renaming is a bit like hiding the
origin, which is not what i want.

About the package name.
How would you map org.eclipse.osgi and org.osgi?
How to map non-eclipse packages?

More information about the Digitalmars-d-dwt mailing list