Many questions

[Christopher Wright]

Fractal wrote:
>> That's debatable.  The hateful thing about namespaces is that they give
>> you absolutely ZERO clue as to where any particular thing is coming from.
>>
>> If I see "tango.io.device.File", I know exactly where the source for
>> that module is.
>>
>>   -- Daniel
> 
> Yes it is true. But the thing is not "where is it". The thing that i want to remark is "what long".
> 
> If you use a namespace, you can write many big classes in separate files without problem, and also, with the same namespace. (and also allowing separate a multiplatform class in different files, for each one).
> 
> With modules you are limited in a single file. And it will grow potentially with multiplatform code, and makes hard to find a error or line...
> Added to it, the amout of version statements.
> 
> Also Namespaces can use upper case characters... documentation indicates that package and module names should be written all in lower case.
> 
> A good point for modules is the permisson to access private or protected members of types declared in the same module or package, without the "friend" keyword anywhere.
> In namespaces, it can be done by sharing access to all namespace types.
> 
> Really module, packages, and namespaces are the same thing. The unique thing that i want, is the possibility of use many files as one (for modules)

Modules are compilation units. This makes them different from namespaces.

Packages are for the compiler to find source code. Namespaces are for 
humans to find source code. These have sufficient overlap that they have 
been unified.

For modules to do what you want, a module cannot be the unit of 
compilation. What then will be the unit of compilation? And why is this 
feature important enough to merit the change?