On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:07:49 -0500, Jim Starkey wrote:

>I agree. Unless we impose a heavy naming standard, we need to cope with
>the problem that two database functions may have the same entrypoint
>name but in different modules.
>
>But I still want to see a full solution (which wouldn't be cast in
>concrete) before we agree on a subset.

Just to *this* problem you could make the module name be part
of the name of function (optional, most of time). So when two functions
have the same name but different entry point (in the same context)
could wirte
(for example):
ibudf.addSec
fbudf.addSec

Just a suggestion...