struts-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Brian Lee" <>
Subject Re: [FRIDAY] package naming nonsense
Date Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:52:56 GMT
That's pretty much the reasoning I always got behing. This remings me of a 
funny time a consultant  suggested removing all the "com." from our package 
names in order to "save 4 bytes" from each class file.


>From: Hubert Rabago <>
>To: Struts Users Mailing List <>
>Subject: Re: [FRIDAY] package naming nonsense
>Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 07:09:24 -0500
>IIRC, it really was the possibility of mix-ups that was the idea
>behind using TLDs for package names.  At least with TLDs, one can
>reasonably assume that the groups sharing the same TLD could work out
>organizing package naming conventions amongst themselves.  Without the
>convention, the IT groups of and would just have
>to hope that they never have a common customer, or they never work on
>any package with the same name.
>The problem about unique names doesn't apply to JAR files because you
>can just rename them.
>Let's at least be thankful we don't have to use URIs
>(  :)
>On 6/17/05, Adam Hardy <> wrote:
> > Since it's Friday and I'm just about to start a new project, I thought
> > I'd ask everyone what they think about something that's always bugged 
> >
> > Package names in Java. Why do we all have com.blah.blah or
> > instead of just plain blah.blah.blah and
> >
> > And even if there is, why is the mix-up possibility so important when it
> > comes to package names, when it's not considered when it comes to jar
> > naming conventions. If there ever was a com.apache.struts, what would
> > they call their jar? Would they have to use com_struts-1.2.7.jar
> >
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message