On Tuesday 21 November 2006 18:36, James E Keenan wrote: > 3 identically named subroutines: 2 in modules and 1 in a script. And > all 3 will be in modules as I'm planning to refactor much of pmc2c.pl > into a module called Parrot::Pmc2c::Utils. (For drafts of these > revisions, see http://thenceforward.net/parrot/.) > > This is not good, right? Suggestions as to how to proceed?
Which one do we actually use now? Let's consider that the canonical one. If there is one, it'll be nice to see if there are any appreciable differences in output between the three. That'll let those of us who've written PMCs before have a chance to see if there are significant features of one over the others. -- c
