On 4/16/2012 1:54 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:52:54 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer <[email protected]> wrote:But we need to change the name early on to avoid conflicts. I don't think a more generic name would be inappropriate, even if the GC is the only client at first.Should have said "But we need to change the name early on to avoid confusion later", i.e. "why is this GCInfo template generating reflection info that the GC doesn't use?"
Not a bad idea.
