[pro] code organization and name conflicts

[Thomas M. Hermann]

For your specific example, I would do some combination of

   - Figure out why there are 2 GET-WAN-IPS helpers, how they differ, and
   factor to a single function.
   - Change GET-WAN-IP to a generic function and factor.
   - Create another package and factor.

The entire point of packages is to avoid name conflicts. So, if you are
experiencing a name conflict in a single package, it's time to factor the
code.

Search the archives for a recent discussion on conflicts between packages,
maybe that has some insight that is applicable to your issue.

Good luck,

Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas M. Hermann
Odonata Research LLC
http://www.odonata-research.com/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/thomasmhermann


On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Ryan Davis <ryan at acceleration.net> wrote:

>  When working on a larger lisp code base, one with 10+ files in one
> package, I begin to get nervous about accidental name conflicts, and was
> wondering how other people deal with this.
>
> Here's the scenario I'm worried about:
>
>    - dsl.lisp, written by a coworker two years ago, has a number of small
>    functions that are helpers for the main #'WRITE-DSL-REPORT function; one of
>    these helpers is #'GET-WAN-IPS
>     - nagios-config.lisp, written by me today, has a number of small
>    functions that are helpers for the main #'WRITE-NAGIOS-CONFIG function; one
>    of these helpers is #'GET-WAN-IPS
>    - I miss the compiler warning about redefining #'GET-WAN-IPS
>     - I test my code, it works in my REPL so I commit and call it a day
>     - Code eventually gets pushed to production and #'WRITE-DSL-REPORT is
>    broken
>
> It doesn't happen very often (and testing procedures usually catch stuff
> before it goes to production), but it seems like there should be a nicer way
> to deal with helper functions that you want to develop/test from the REPL,
> but don't need to be used outside the current file.
>
> I had a few ideas to solve it, none of which I really like.  I could add a
> top-level FLET for the file, but the extra indentation will be annoying and
> it'll be harder to test/maintain those helper functions.  I could define a
> helper package, per-file, and put my helper functions in that package (e.g.
> (defun nagios-config-helpers::get-wan-ips ...)), but that feels funny and
> awkward, which usually means it's a bad idea.  I could break up my code into
> many smaller packages, each exporting and importing the functions needed
> elsewhere in the system, but that seems like recipe for dependency headaches
> and a lot of unneeded paperwork.
>
> Do other people have this anxiety?  Are there elegant ways to deal with it?
> (besides medication and more unit testing)
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Ryan Davis
> Acceleration.net
> Director of Programming Services
> 2831 NW 41st street, suite B
> Gainesville, FL 32606
>
> Office: 352-335-6500 x 124
> Fax: 352-335-6506
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pro mailing list
> pro at common-lisp.net
> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/pro/attachments/20110413/36b2add2/attachment.html>