At 01:20 PM 9/10/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>On Monday 10 September 2001 01:08 pm, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > And in addition - why are we worrying about namespace collision RIGHT NOW?
> > Sure, when Parrot can be embedded, then we should ensure that our names
> > aren't going to clash. But who in their right minds is going to embed
> > Parrot in anything in its current state? (Leon, I said "in their right
> > minds")
> >
> > It's not a priority, compared to getting working code out there. We can
> > sort it out later.
>
>Oh, how many times have I heard that before?
Yeah, me too. :)
Seriously, I think we should get it right from the start, if for no other
reason than I can stop writing opcode and utility functions with the same
name and coring the interpreter. (Which would be a nice change) It is my
fault to begin with, since I started the show with no prefixes.
It may also make things easier when we start dynaloading libraries, as
we'll be doing pretty darned soon. (String and opcode function libraries,
at least, and the rest will follow)
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
