On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 11:52:16AM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote: > On Friday 22 March 2002 11:36, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > At 10:02 AM -0500 3/22/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: > > I'm up in the air as to whether any of the core routines should have > > a Parrot prefix--I'm thinking not, as I don't think any of them > > should be exposed. > > I vote for "not".
I'd vote for not, except that we're exposing the names at link level when we link between two internal parrot object files, so they can clash with names of functions which parrot is being embedded into. So I think there is good reason to lumber ourselves with prefixed names. Nicholas Clark -- Even better than the real thing: http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/
