RTTI data member names

[Martin von Loewis]

> Furthermore, I've got to say that at this point we're becoming
> frustrated with changes to the ABI that aren't absolutely essential.

I had the concerns about naming the RTTI types from the beginning; I
apologize for not objecting earlier. I agree in principle that the ABI
is in maintainence mode now; I disagree that such a change would have
a serious impact.

> Quite frankly, we've done a lot of work (by implementing the ABI) to
> flush out issues, and we feel that the existence of these
> implementations ought to be considered at this point.

If you are thinking of the specific implementation I think you are
thinking of, I'd volunteer to update that, provided there is agreement
on the substance of the issue.

Regards,
Martin