OK thanks but that goes against the ethos of a library node - that it should be standard and consistent. If I (say) do a hashsplit with 7 outputs, put composite library nodes to each output and then take the bundled output to pass elsewhere I think you are saying I have to rename every library node output individually to be able to make use of that bundle. So different (!) library nodes.
I am not looking to hark back to the old days but LAE would have allowed me to take the bundle and still differentiate part of the each bundle for passing to the next stage.
For me, one of the key advantages that d360a has over its nearest rivals is d360a's parallelisation. Having to modify library nodes creates a signficant problem if you have the ethos of a) standardisation of logic and b) parallelisation. One can't even rebundle and then unbundle as you can't edit the names in the bundle. It's handicapping one of d360a's key advantages.
