Maybe there's a trick someone can suggest, but I didn't think that was possible. There's a timbreID.c source file for the [timbreID] object in the library, and a timbreIDLib.c source file for building the whole library as a single binary. That calls the _setup() functions for all the individual objects and also has a timbreIDLib_setup function itself. So making the names the same would result in two timbreID_setup() calls that are supposed to do two different things. I never looked into ways to work around that...On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 4:42 PM Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote: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--William Brent
www.williambrent.com
“Great minds flock together”
Conflations: conversational idiom for the 21st century
www.conflations.com