In this instance the Nim and JS libraries have different names (and even different spellings of the common subset) so I don't see an issue.
That's an awful lot of sass from someone who didn't bother to read my post:
1. You're not using the language name in your search query like I suggested one should. So your example is moot.
2. You're still being highly critical about something that is awfully hard to get right. Naming projects is one of the hardest things you can do to a project. Firefox went through 2 naming collisions before they landed on Firefox. As an open source contributor myself I frequently get people say "Your name is used by this thing over here too" despite me spending literally hours going through multiple different name options and Googling them to see if they have a presence (search engines aren't always good for checking this stuff by the way).
When there are hundreds of thousands of people creating software each month, you quickly run out of phonetics to use. While naming might seem like an infinitely large namespace, in practice there's only a finite number of names out there yet a literal infinity of projects due to new ones popping up all the time. So collisions aren't just inevitable, they're going to become more frequent too.
This is why open source frameworks for different languages where the spellings differ is fine in my opinion because you should always include the language you're targeting in your search query for more accurate results anyway.
Sometimes I think people just like to throw namespace collisions as a criticism on HN because they're too lazy to research the framework properly but still want to appear knowledgeable to everyone else. It's literally the lowest effort critique one can make on a project.
Do you really want to pretend with all your might that naming your graphics library after the same creature as another graphics library is a good idea? Really?
Coincidentally I just named a rendering library for WebGL a few days ago and it's already the first result on google.
Naming projects isn't that hard if you don't want a 3-6 letter name. There's only so many possible combinations of five characters. You'd think software developers of all people would understand that and maybe stop giving their projects short names that look like acronyms and convey literally no meaning.
The easiest way is to pick a longer descriptive name with a good acronym. If your project becomes popular, it'll become known by that acronym. Most 2 word combinations aren't taken either.
People make associations all the time with often unrelated things. That's exactly how our brains are wired to operate. The fact is the names in question are still different.
> Coincidentally I just named a rendering library for WebGL a few days ago and it's already the first result on google.
Google tailors results. And I bet if you shared the name of your library I'd find some similar project that I have an association with when I hear your name.
> Naming projects isn't that hard
Naming things is incredibly hard!
> There's only so many possible combinations of five characters. You'd think software developers of all people would understand that and maybe stop giving their projects short names that look like acronyms and convey literally no meaning.
Love the contradiction of how you start out by saying naming things isn't hard and then go on to explain why naming things is hard. It's also worth noting that adding more characters creates might create more entropy but there's still only so many phonetic phrases available before you drift into the realm of stupidly long names.
> The easiest way is to pick a longer descriptive name with a good acronym. If your project becomes popular, it'll become known by that acronym. Most 2 word combinations aren't taken either.
Please no. Acronyms are almost as bad for names as stupid pseudo-words (like SPDY and NGINX). A name doesn't have to be English, but it should at least be a word. Otherwise you're making things artificially hard for anyone who isn't a native English speaker or who has reading difficulties (like dyslexia).
Like I keep saying, naming things is incredibly hard.
They're both named "Pixie" and they're both graphics libraries. I assume you meant something else than what you literally said, but I'm not sure what
It seems absurd to me that developers are too lazy to add one extra keyword to their search to ensure they get specific results, yet are happy to moan about maintainers not putting enough effort in to avoid namespace collisions in a finite pool of usable project names (and particularly when the project names here are literally different). This strikes me as bad workmen blaming their tools; you have a bad search etiquette and are then passing the buck onto the maintainers to fix.
Sorry if that seams harsh but naming things is really hard but adding `nim` into your search query is really easy. To me it is pretty clear cut where this problem should be solved.