Out of curiosity, why has it always been suggested to move functions to the POSIX module? I think it would be better to have the POSIX module as some kind of META-module which contains all POSIX-things implemented in Pike, but as aliases for the proper pike functions when such are available. Eg. if the toplevel namespace is cleaned up, the most logical place to på math-function would be a Math module, but this does not imply that the functions cannot exist in the POSIX module too. The POSIX module should of course also include the non-portable POSIX stuff which ought only to exist in that module.
/ Mikael Brandström (ogg! ogg! ogg!)
Previous text:
2002-09-04 12:54: Subject: argv[0]?
It's not all bad, but I don't think you will get many followers on dropping top level support for abs, acos, ceil and similar. While it might make sense to move them to Math (if we *really* want to clean up the top level), few would consider POSIX when doing maths. The modules you propose now would probably work well for very obviously system dependent syscalls that belong rather strictly to one OS/arch family.
Still, +1 on adding the Posix and Win32 modules. It's ideomatic enough for me at least for the cases described above.
/ Johan Sundström (risplockare)