From: Marcus Lindblom (macke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-07 11:42:30
Beman Dawes wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> on Tue Aug 07 2007, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:
>>> Ah! I wasn't happy with 'core' either, but failed to come up with
>>> anything better. "Prerequisite" is definitely better.
>> I would use "dependent" and "dependency."
> The trouble with those is that they describe a library that depends on
> another. We need a word to describe the library being depended upon.
I've used 'dependee', but I'm not sure if it's correct English.
(IMHO it makes sufficient sense when discussing dependencies back and
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk