"Sergio A. Kessler" wrote:

...

...

...

I was rather thinking of something like "MyProgram_MyFunction" or "MyUnit_MyFunction". When we introduce function overloading, additional suffixes indicating the parameter types can come up.

"GPC_MyUnit_MyFunction" I think this will never choke with the linker...

It will very easily. Just declare `int GPC_MyUnit_MyFunction;' in a C file and try to link it. What we should use IMHO is `MyUnit.MyFunction' (or any character instead of `.' that cannot occur in an identifier). Then, we can be sure that it doesn't cause problems (except perhaps with C++ which does its own name mangling, so we might have to look at it -- but it's quite different in different compilers and versions)-: ...

...

I'd find it a little egocentric of GPC to name all user functions after himself ... ;-)

I don't think so... GPC must say "this is my territory, don't bother me"

I think is a clever namespace for GPC, well deserved. egocentry of a _product_ is not bad ...

That's a marketing question, and I don't disagree. ;-) However, as I said, anything only consisting of letters, numbers and underscores in a way is already C's "reserved" name space... Frank -- Frank Heckenbach, frank@g-n-u.de, http://fjf.gnu.de/ GPC To-Do list, latest features, fixed bugs: http://agnes.dida.physik.uni-essen.de/~gnu-pascal/todo.html