Em qui, 1 de ago de 2019 às 13:27, William Brent <william.brent@gmail.com> escreveu:
Hi Alex, thanks for taking a look. Yes - the reason I ended up calling the single library binary timbreIDLib is that there was already a [timbreID] object in the library. I just wanted to avoid confusion. Looking back, I wish I had named that object something else. At this point I think I'd rather live with an awkwardly named library rather than change the name of any individual object within it, but I'm open to suggestions.

My suggestion was to change the name of library, not the object. But I don't really understand the challenges involved (haven't really checked the code structure). Though I think it's feasible. What do you say? Have you considered it and thought it wasn't possible or worth it?

cheers