[Cosmo-dev] Re: [commits-cosmo] (br) [4567] this is a better way not to clobber namespaces.

[Nicola Piccinini]

Hi,

thanks for your kind reply.
Unfortunately my message was vague and I need to make it more precise.

> Actually, in the 0.6.1, the references to 'Cal' you see in the code 
> point to cosmo.ui.cal_main.Cal. You can see the alias at the bottom of 
> cosmo/ui/cal_main.js.

yes but I meant really cosmo.view.cal (sorry for confusing ideas calling 
it "cal" singleton).
In Cosmo 0.6.1 we have the following hierarchy:
cosmo.view.cal
cosmo.view.cal.Lozenge
cosmo.view.cal.canvas
cosmo.view.cal.conflict
cosmo.view.cal.dialog

So cosmo.view.cal is a namespace.
Moreover cosmo.view.cal is also a singleton, in fact in cal.js we have:
cosmo.view.cal = new function () {
...
}

That means that Lozenge, canvas, etc. are properties of this singleton 
and if the singleton is inadvertely reinitialized, this properties are 
lost. This in fact caused me some troubles and I had to "mixed in" the 
cosmo.view.cal object with cosmo.view.cal namespace to solve them.

As far as I can understand, in cosmo 0.7 things aren't much different in 
fact in [4567] you are mixing in the "new function()" with the 
namespace. The situation is even more awkward because of the scoping 
questions explained by Travis.

So my point is: why not to avoid some of these potential problems 
separating cosmo.view.cal namespace from cosmo.view.cal object (which 
could become cosmo.view.cal.Cal)? What are the advantages in maintaining 
the current double nature of cosmo.view.cal?

Many thanks,
Nicola