[PD-dev] loaderHEX bug report

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

> 
> What about alt_0x3c0x3c0x3c_setup()?  That would highlight that its an  

but this really makes and object called [alt_0x3c0x3c0x3c] impossible!

> alternate name, rather than just having an seemingly arbitrary reversal  
> of the "setup" placement.  And the function is called  
> sys_load_lib_alt().  That makes more sense in terms of the API.

well calling it sys_load_lib_alt() was a very fast decision (so i am not 
proud of it).
i still think that the alternative setup function should be called 
fundamentally differently, so that it is impossible to make an object 
with a normal setup-function that is named like the alternative function 
of another object.

but probably it would be nice to hear somebody else's opinion on this 
(at least from those who are not entirely bored of this thread)

mfg.ads.r
IOhannes