--- Robert Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMHO encapsulating functions in objects provides decent namespacing
> functionality. I can't really see a large need beyond what classes
> provide. True that then there's still an issue with class names, but
> that's less frequent a collision.
I thi
On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 12:02, Chris Shiflett wrote:
> --- Al <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have a page that calls functions from two different include files.
> > Unfortunately, some of the functions have the same name; but are
> > slightly different.
> >
> > I know I can change the names of
--- Al <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a page that calls functions from two different include files.
> Unfortunately, some of the functions have the same name; but are
> slightly different.
>
> I know I can change the names of the conflicting functions; but, that
> is a bit of a chore.
I
Al wrote:
I have a page that calls functions from two different include files.
Unfortunately, some of the functions have the same name; but are
slightly different.
I know I can change the names of the conflicting functions; but, that is
a bit of a chore.
Is it possible to control from which in
I have a page that calls functions from two different include files.
Unfortunately, some of the functions have the same name; but are
slightly different.
I know I can change the names of the conflicting functions; but, that is
a bit of a chore.
Is it possible to control from which include f
5 matches
Mail list logo