Namespace name is too general.

[josephknight]

First of all, thank you for your work.

Forgive me for my bluntness please, Ricardo, but this name choice is a bad move.

Check out .NET namespace naming conventions. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms229026(v=vs.100).aspx

You've created a library now that has a namespace that is not specifically named, but now extremely general within the LibNoise topic... I mean, it's now called "LibNoise"... the most general LibNoise name possible.

This means that if someone else creates a LibNoise library and also uses this bad practice, the packages will conflict.

It means that this library cannot be used with a general non-Unity LibNoise library that has more right to use the "LibNoise" namespace.

The standard is that you use your organization as a qualifier before the library name, then features beyond that if it's a large package:

<Company>.(<Product>|<Technology>)[.<Feature>][.<Subnamespace>]

Recommending, using operators as an example, the namespace would be: namespace Numergent.LibNoiseUnity.Operators

Note that the product combines the two technologies into one namespace item to match the project's name.

Note that Operator and Generator should be plural as per spec:

"Consider using plural namespace names where appropriate. For example, use System.Collections instead of System.Collection."

I know you like simple. Me too. But namespaces need to be at this recommended level of complexity for very good reasons.

Thanks again for your efforts. I really hope this info helps. Keep up the great work.

[josephknight]

Also would you like me to submit a pull request with renaming? I'd be happy to later revise the request as you see fit.

Best wishes.

[ricardojmendez]

I'm sorry for the late reply, the last few months have been crazy busy. By all means, feel free to submit a PR if you're still interested. Cheers!