On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 11:43:24AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> >
> >As a data point, some time ago (7.2 days) I used to do this as a
> >matter of completeness, and never had a collision.
>
> The point I at least have been trying to make is that extensions
> generally (e.g. from pgfoundry) should protect themselves from possible
> collisions with core and other unknown extensions that might be loaded,
> by using unique namespace(s), and further, that the standard extensions
This wasn't a disagreement with your general point. I was just
trying to say that the problem did not ine fact exist at some point,
so the empirical rathole perhaps doesn't need to be explored. The
style question is the only one that is relevant, I think. (I happen
to agree with you on that, and it seems to me that a more complete
proposal for namespace guidelines might be nice.)
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
I remember when computers were frustrating because they *did* exactly what
you told them to. That actually seems sort of quaint now. --J.D. Baldwin