While applying my global C inliner to Hugs code, I got a (legitimate) warning that struct strScript has different definitions in script.c:39 and storage.c:1605. As far as C compilers are concerned, there's nothing wrong with this but it seems like a needless source of confusion for programmers. Two renamings suggest themselves: 1) The definition of strScript in storage.c is really concerned with modules so it should be called strModule (and associated functions renamed consistently). But, there is already a strModule. It seems that strScript could be inlined into strModule but it's a fairly major change. 2) script.c is concerned with files, modification dates of files, etc. so we could change strScript to strFile. For consistency, we might rename some of the functions from that module too - but that's a more major change. Or we can leave Hugs as it is. I've sifted through warnings produced on a range of SPEC benchmarks and I'd say that Hugs is better constructed than most open source code out there. -- Alastair Reid