On Fri, 16 Jun 2006, Joel E. Denny wrote: > On Fri, 16 Jun 2006, Paul Eggert wrote: > > > This all sounds OK (in that I can't simplify it much more :-) except > > that the names are still confusing. "%pre-defines" sounds like > > predefined symbols, but then "%post-defines" would be -- what -- > > postdefined symbols? > [...] > Would %defines-pre and %defines-post be any better to you? That would be > just as fine with me.
I guess this didn't help. How about %before-defines and %after-defines? That way, no one can read "pre-defines" and "pre-defined". Joel
