> > Maybe something wrong with the regproc type?
>
> regprocout doesn't schema-qualify if the function name is unique without
> it.
Ok. Maybe too clever, as I couldn't guess by looking at it.
> Of course, the function name isn't necessarily unique *with* it, either,
> but regproc can't do anything about that. Cast to regprocedure if you
> want to see a more helpful display of the function.
Much better indeed.
Thanks a lot for the light. Have a nice day.
--
Fabien Coelho - coelho@cri.ensmp.fr