I wrote:
>
> In connection with completing David Fetter's array of composites
> patch, I am looking at doing some better name mangling for array types
> as recently discussed. What I'm thinking of is prepending one or more
> underscores to the type name up to some limit (NAMEDATALEN / 2 ?) and
> if necessary truncating the result, and then looking to see if there
> is a name clash. That would, I hope, enable us to get rid of all the
> places where we require names to be no more than NAMEDATALEN - 2
> chars. Does that seem like a reasonable approach? Will it break
> anything, i.e., is there somewhere that has assumes the array type for
> foo will be called _foo rather than ___foo ?
Actually, looking back in the email history I see Tom suggested this,
which I'll try instead:
> prepend _, truncate to less than 64 bytes if necessary,
> then substitute numbers at the end if needed to get something unique.
cheers
andrew