Issue #21385 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze). Agreed naming this new feature `Namespace` is very confusing and misleading. `isolates` doesn't sound right because they are not really isolated. I think `Context` would be fine. TruffleRuby has a similar feature called `InnerContext` (except those have separate heaps and are more like multiple interpreters + easy communication (notably enables passing an object from a context to another), but on a high semantics level it is very similar). ---------------------------------------- Misc #21385: Namespace: Suggesting a rename https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21385#change-113511 * Author: fxn (Xavier Noria) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- I'd like to suggest a rename of namespaces. The word "namespace" is already taken in Ruby. We say that classes and modules act as or represent namespaces. Constant paths nest them in practice. We say that it is a best practice that gems create their own namespace, etc. If the feature goes ahead with this name, the above sentences, well-established in the Ruby community, will start to sound confusing, because that meaning of "namespace" stays. If you look at the index in Matz's book, "namespaces" is indexed in pages 248–250. Title of section 7.5.1 is "Modules as Namespaces". Besides, I have had a few experiences explaining the proposal to people, and quickly realizing they assume this is something like C++ namespaces or Java packages. Then, I have to undo that mental model and start all over saying "forget that mental model". Those are like our constant paths, only more simple and strict. I think it may also be confusing in this sense (though this could be OK if it wasn't for the previous point.) To be constructive: Some alternative names that I have thought about are "isolates", "shields", or "cells". ("sandboxes" is close, but may have security connotations you do not want to suggest.) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/