consider using Go style package name and split code into packages about iota.go

[knarz]

The package itself is named giota.

See also #29 (comment)

I just change the repo to giota again. (Nobody tell Dom!)

[cwarner818]

I agree that package naming is not standard for Go. I imagine they did this to keep with the other things in their repo, but I would still like to see it changed.

What parts do you think could be split out? The package isn't really that complex to begin with.

[cwarner818]

I think giota is a decent name, but wouldn't iota as the package name be better? I would tend to name the repo directory iota-go or go-iota and then use package iota in the code. This makes the repo stand out in the organizations list but also denotes what the true package name is.

[knarz]

iota is a constant in go so I'm not sure if renaming the package to that would be a great idea.

[cwarner818]

Aw come on now, where's your sense of adventure?

…

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018, 9:28 AM Sascha Hanse ***@***.***> wrote: iota is a constant in go so I'm not sure if renaming the package to that would be a great idea. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#50 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AehY3R07mOfikuAaLbqwPo92PKU8hWtDks5tUwmZgaJpZM4SCK8O> .

[knarz]

Hah, I just changed it locally and nothing broke, so far.
I'm not really opposed to changing it to iota but if .go in the repository name breaks things, I wouldn't even want to imagine what having your package named iota could possibly break.

[cwarner818]

Throw this in your file and watch it break:

const (
    thing int = iota
    thing2
    thing3
)

[luca-moser]

I've split the package into multiple smaller ones and made the repo go modules agnostic.