Phango - questions

[Lars Ivar Igesund]

Christopher Wright wrote:

> Sean Kelly wrote:
>> Christopher Wright wrote:
>>> Don Clugston wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Incidentally, one stylistic change between Phobos and Tango which
>>>> hasn't been mentioned, is that Phobos uses a flat structure (except
>>>> for a couple of things like std.c.windows.windows!). IMHO, the flat
>>>> structure is decidedly inferior.
>>>
>>> Why is that?
>>>
>>> I work on a decently sized (40k lines) project in C#, and we're moving
>>> from a deep hierarchy to a shallow one -- it's less typing, and we
>>> don't see any advantages in the deeper structure.
>>>
>>> If you point out a reasonable advantage, then I can probably work
>>> quicker.
>>>
>>> The documentation should be hierarchical or task-oriented, of course,
>>> so you can find what you're looking for easily.
>> 
>> This is why I like deeper hierarchies.  I tend to look at the code
>> itself for reference more often than the documentation itself, so it's
>> nice to have the code grouped in a manner that matches the documentation.

> 
> And again, you only have to write a module once, but you read it many
> times. When you're reading it, you know exactly which modules it
> references, so a flat structure is faster.

I think an open source project have it's code browsed very often, and even
modified/mantained regularly - so I do think Sean has a point. As with
everything else, there are many opinions though. I tend to like deep more
than flat, even if I see pros for the flat hierarchy.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango