You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In RepyV1, module "imports" were actually inlined using the Repy preprocessor repypp. Module functions were always prefixed with the module name, e.g. advertise_lookup, so that no inadvertent aliasing / name collisions occur. In RepyV2, dylink lets us import modules much like Python's import modulename (see also #137), so we don't need the un-aliasing anymore.
I suggest we refactor the function names across modules to drop the module-name prefix. What do others think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In RepyV1, module "imports" were actually inlined using the Repy
preprocessor repypp. Module functions were always prefixed with the
module name, e.g. advertise_lookup, so that no inadvertent aliasing /
name collisions occur. In RepyV2, dylink lets us import modules much like
Python's import modulename (see also #137 #137), so we
don't need the un-aliasing anymore.
I suggest we refactor the function names across modules to drop the
module-name prefix. What do others think?
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #176.
In RepyV1, module "imports" were actually inlined using the Repy preprocessor
repypp
. Module functions were always prefixed with the module name, e.g.advertise_lookup
, so that no inadvertent aliasing / name collisions occur. In RepyV2,dylink
lets us import modules much like Python'simport modulename
(see also #137), so we don't need the un-aliasing anymore.I suggest we refactor the function names across modules to drop the module-name prefix. What do others think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: