At 10:59 AM 7/31/2001 +0100, Dave Mitchell wrote:
>Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This came up on comp.lang.perl.misc once, and Ilya Z. then wrote, IIRC,
> > that there's no reason why the DLL (if I may call it this way) should
> > have a name identical to the module name. His example
Back in the mists of time (May 29th), I solicited comments on my second
draft of the deeply thrilling "Conventions and Guidelines for Perl
Source Code". There were various contributions, but having more interesting
things to do [watching paint dry etc - Ed], I never got round to incorporating
them
Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This came up on comp.lang.perl.misc once, and Ilya Z. then wrote, IIRC,
> that there's no reason why the DLL (if I may call it this way) should
> have a name identical to the module name. His example was that on his
> port, for OS/2, he added a (machine gen
