For me, this is a simple naming thing ... but also a must!<br><br>As I see it, the problem (or at least, /a/ problem) is that if I have modules:<br>x.a<br>x.b<br>x.c<br>x.d<br><br>Then I cannot simultaneously have a module called
<br>x<br><br>(and have it be in the same package as x.a, etc.). And yet, that is often exactly what I want to do. The "D-way" seems to be to name the package<br>x.x<br><br>but that's ugly, so, if naming a package
<br>x.this<br><br>will allow me to refer to it as just x, then I'm all for it. I don't actually care what goes /in/ the package though. That's up to whoever writes it.<br><br>