On Thu, 25 May 2000, Greg Ward wrote:
> A question of terminology: frequently in the Distutils docs I need to
> refer to the package-that-is-not-a-package, ie. the "root" or "empty"
> package. I can't decide if I prefer "root package", "empty package" or
> what. ("Empty" just means the *name* is empty, so it's probably not a
> very good thing to say "empty package" -- but "package with no name" or
> "unnamed package" aren't much better.)
Well, it's not a package -- it's similar to Java's unnamed package, but
the idea that it's a package has never been advanced. Why not just call
it the global module space (or namespace)? That's the only way I've heard
it described, and it's more clear than "empty package" or "unnamed
package".
-Fred
--
Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4