Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpl-opus!hpcc05!hpyhde4!hpycla!hpcuhc!hpcupt3!shankar
From: shankar@hpcupt3.cup.hp.com (Shankar Unni)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: Re: "module" facility for top-level namespace control
Message-ID: <46890001@hpcupt3.cup.hp.com>
Date: 27 May 91 04:58:02 GMT
References: <5508@lupine.NCD.COM>
Organization: HP India Software Op., Bangalore
Lines: 18

In comp.std.c++, rfg@NCD.COM (Ron "Loose Cannon" :-] Guilmette) writes:

> Given that Ada is a dirty word in most C++ circles, I think that "module"
> is probably the choice which will engender the least hostility.

An even more subjective criterion, but which, IMHO, should also be seriously
considered, is the likelihood of a proposed keyword being used as an identifier
in someone's C (or C++) program. One of the worst new keywords in C++ was
"class", which broke a heck of a lot of old C programs (not to mention the X11
headers). Still, that's water under the bridge. Let's, however, try to avoid
repeating the mistake.

"module" *seems* less likely to be used as an id than "package", but what do
I know?
-----
Shankar Unni                                   E-Mail:
HP India Software Operation, Bangalore       Internet: shankar@india.hp.com
Phone : +91-812-261254 x417                      UUCP: ...!hplabs!hpda!shankar