3 Feb
2003
3 Feb
'03
8:55 a.m.
It has the disadvantage of exposing _Foo to the global module namespace though. And module.pmod.in works with statically linked modules as well.
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
Previous text:
2003-02-03 14:50: Subject: Two questions
I think it is good practice to use distinct names for the lower level C module and the corresponding Pike module. Having Foo.pmod inherit Foo.so (if that's what you're suggesting) seems unnecessarily obscure to me. I'd prefer Foo.pmod to inherit _Foo.so (and the latter will also work in the obvious way if _Foo is statically linked).
/ Niels Möller ()