Thanks.
I ask one more moment of assistance to ensure proper structure. Do the 3
groupings below make sense to you? Elements of the "FameHLI::HLI" module
will be regularly used by anyone using the functions in either of the other
two sets. Or would it be more appropriate to have "HLI" and "EXT
On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 07:33:32AM -0400, Dave Oberholtzer wrote:
> Tim said:
> > Seems best to share the Fame::* namespace, in which
> > case you can call it anything you like under there.
>
> Allow me to respectfully disagree. I would agree with you on an
> intellectual level were it not for t
tionally, it does not include new functionality available in the
newer releases of Fame and _cannot_ incorporate that functionality easily
with any sort of backward compatibility.
--daveo
-Original Message-
From: Tim Bunce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 6:19 AM
To:
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Bunce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 3:49 AM
> To: Oberholtzer, Dave
> Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: Re: New Perl Module: FameHLI
>
>
> Any XS API module tends
ith
their crowd).
--daveo
-Original Message-
From: Tim Bunce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 3:49 AM
To: Oberholtzer, Dave
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: New Perl Module: FameHLI
Any XS API module tends to spawn p
Any XS API module tends to spawn purp-perl module built over it.
I think a Fame::* (or better still FameHLI::*) category should be added
to provide a natrual home for those. Your module could be FameHLI::API
or similar.
Tim.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2001 at 02:11:34PM -0500, Oberholtzer, Dave wrote:
> NA
