Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

3
  • (1) At a very basic level, if namespaces should be bound to their assembly, why do namespaces then not automatically prepend themselves with their assembly's name? The ability to change it suggests that there are valid reasons to do so. (2) Extensions methods exist precisely to behave as if they were part of the extended type. Forcing a separate namespace effectively negates that by requiring consumers to know it's an extension method that needs to be included separately. Commented Oct 27, 2019 at 12:06
  • Re "CompanyName.FrameworkExtensions": Perl CPAN has a similar convention of appending an 'X' to package names, e.g. MooseX, MojoX, CatalystX, ... Commented Oct 27, 2019 at 16:26
  • @Flater Preventing you from extending namespaces you don't own, would also create a barrier to the owner's ability to extend their own namespaces. In the OSS world, it's also good to be able to extend someone else's namespace, for your own internal purposes, but you should not publish such code. Commented Dec 23, 2023 at 3:20