Maybe I'll just keep it implementation since impltype isn't that much
shorter and is very appealing. We could call it "imp" ;-)
Jim
On Jun 20, 2006, at 10:02 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Jim Marino wrote:
yea sounds good except I'll abbreviate "implementation" to "impl" so
the package names are reasonable.
I think impl would be confusing given its usage elsewhere (as the
package containing the impl of an api) - how about "impltype" ?
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
