Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!chinet!nucsrl!gore
From: gore@nucsrl.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: So what's wrong with Aegis?
Message-ID: <6840003@nucsrl.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 6-Jun-87 14:54:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: nucsrl.6840003
Posted: Sat Jun  6 14:54:01 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 7-Jun-87 19:57:21 EDT
References: <668935@ub.cc.umich.edu>
Organization: Northwestern U, Evanston IL, USA
Lines: 26

/ nucsrl:comp.sys.apollo / mishkin@apollo.UUCP (Nathaniel Mishkin) /
>
>[Using prefixes such as "<facility>_"]
>minimizes name conflicts while still allowing
>people to use "good names" (e.g. "open") instead of creating funny variants
>of the good names.  Second, I find it useful in looking at a piece of
>code to know what subroutines calls are likely to be related.  I think
>that as the set of library and system calls on Unix grew (esp. in 4.2),
>it became very hard to keep track of things (and also, they used up more
>good names).
>
>                -- Nat Mishkin

The way I see it, this argument is about how AEGIS and Unix go about
compensating for what really is a programming language deficiency.  In many of
the newer languages, you can prefix the routine name with the name of the
library from which it came, if there is a naming clash, and not use the prefix
if there is no clash.

This problem will disappear when the outdated languages become obsolete.
Sigh... maybe next century... (:-( & (:-)

Jacob Gore
Northwestern University, Computer Science Research Lab
{gargoyle,ihnp4,chinet}!nucsrl!gore
gore@EECS.NWU.Edu (for now, only from ARPA)