Re: Filename problem in CEDET merge

["Eric M. Ludlam" <eric@siege-engine.com>]

On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 12:45 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: "Eric M. Ludlam" <eric@siege-engine.com>
> > Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 22:26:42 -0400
> > Cc: zappo@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > 
> >   First, I just want to say, that if needed, I don't mind doing some
> > renames to simplify maintenance.
> 
> Thank you.  Would doing it as I suggested in my other mail be
> acceptable to you?

My concern with your other method is that we'd end up with some pretty
generic file names and no way to know that they are related to this
package by name alone.  (ie, the require statement might say:

(require 'analyze)

which doesn't say too much, where as

(require 'semantic/analyze)

does, which is why I proposed the below.

> > As for having CEDET not work on DOS, I suppose that is up to the
> > folks who use DOS.
> 
> I would like CEDET to work on DOS, unless it uses networking or async
> subprocesses in its core features.
> 
> > ; A hack.
> > (provide 'hack/fooble)
> > -----------
> > 
> > then you can do this:
> > 
> > (require 'hack/fooble)
> > 
> > and Emacs finds it and loads it.  This could be a magic way to have
> > "long" file names on DOS.  Just providing 'fooble won't work.
> 
> This might work for `require', but I don't think it will work for
> `load' (e.g., in ~/.emacs).

Load still works with my example, as:

(load "hack/fooble")

I recognize that this is non-standard, and if it is not appropriate
because of that, that's fine.  Since no-one uses it this way, I don't
doubt that there are bugs hiding here too, so there is a risk to taking
this tactic.

Thanks
Eric