[stringtemplate-interest] package name

[Jonathan Buhacoff]

Can we please keep complete class names?  I agree with Sam Harwell,  
who wrote in a different thread, that StringTemplate or Template is  
clearer than ST.

Jonathan

On Oct 9, 2009, at 1:10 PM, Terence Parr wrote:

>
> On Oct 8, 2009, at 7:08 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 04:33:36PM -0700, Terence Parr wrote:
>>> should i reuse org.stringtemplate or should package be
>>> org.stringtemplate.v4 or something?  The classes are differently
>>> named
>>> so org.stringtemplate.ST and such might be ok.
>>
>> Are there any classes or packages that would overlap?
>
> Don't think so...ha! I just realized that the old package was:
>
> package org.antlr.stringtemplate;
>
> so
>
> package org.stringtemplate;
>
> it is then! no collision.
>
> Ter
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> stringtemplate-interest mailing list
> stringtemplate-interest at antlr.org
> http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/stringtemplate-interest