< . . . >
As an example, would that be: "FancyApp:Getpoint"?
< . . . >
I found that was a good way to identify what belongs with what parent.
With larger projects I'd keep all the support functions in one file which makes compiling a little cleaner.
Keeping variables in scope is pretty easy, they're either local to the child or local to the parent ( or globals can be cleaned up at termination , so there's no pollution)
Usually, if the child function was included local to the parent, I'd just use
_GetPoint and include the symbol in the locals list.
// -----
I'm not suggesting being dogmatic about the proposal.
I know from hard earned experience the advantages for reading and debugging.