> Nathan Torkington wrote:
>
>> I'd rather not revisit this, or any other, RFC until Larry's had a
>> chance to *really* comment and put forward his suggestions.
>
> I think pitching renames for "local" is at least as worthwhile as
> pitching code names. How about "Hold?" It isn't listed in Bla
From: David L. Nicol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> I think pitching renames for "local" is at least as worthwhile
> as pitching code names. How about "Hold?" It isn't listed in
> Blackstone's RFC 19, and it focuses on the restore-later
> aspects -- put that variable on hold, like it is a phon
How about:
scratch #doesn't really imply what it's doing
overload#accurate, kinda long though some might say this is good
dup/duplicate #nasty for the compiler, and perhaps for the newbies,
#but dup'ing var's makes sense, esp. from the C stance
clone/mycopy
