[plt-scheme] Structures added to MzLib

I don't think either of these names are good.

Structures are not for package management, so I think "package" is 
misleading.
"Bundle" is (or will soon be) taken by units, so it's not any better 
than "structure" for avoiding repeated names.

I've been unable to come up with any better names, so I'll stick with 
"structure" for now.

-Scott

On Thursday, March 20, 2003, at 12:32  AM, Michael Sperber [Mr. 
Preprocessor] wrote:

>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
>
>>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Owens <sowens at cs.utah.edu> writes:
>
> Scott>   For list-related administrative tasks:
> Scott>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
>
>
> Scott> On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, at 07:43  PM, Paul Graunke wrote:
>
>>>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>>>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
> Scott> >
>>> Isn't "structure" a confusing name given that we have define-struct
>>> already?  I know the name comes from ML, but it's still confusing.
> Scott> I haven't been able to come up with a less confusing name, so I 
> stuck
> Scott> with the ML name.  Any suggestions?
>
> Hm.
>
> "package"
>
> "bundle"
>
> ?
>
> -- 
> Cheers =8-} Mike
> Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla