1. namespace bug?

I just heard a rumour that a user function name which is the same name as a builtin name will clash even if namespacing is used to clarify which function is being specified. Then i heard people knew about it, and voted to allow this to continue. And people who knew about it kept it hushed up.

Are the rumours correct?

useless

new topic     » topic index » view message » categorize

2. Re: namespace bug?

This is one case that triggers a warning on perfectly valid code just by adding an include:

include std/map.e 
?compare(1,0) 
new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

3. Re: namespace bug?

useless said...

I just heard a rumour that a user function name which is the same name as a builtin name will clash even if namespacing is used to clarify which function is being specified. Then i heard people knew about it, and voted to allow this to continue. And people who knew about it kept it hushed up.

Are the rumours correct?

And Area51 really does have a martian spaceship.

OMG, where do you guys get or dream up these ideas???

If namespaces are used then the clash can be resolved.

There is no one "hushing" up anything. And there is nothing to "hush" up anyway.

Sheesh!!! sad

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

4. Re: namespace bug?

CoJaBo said...

This is one case that triggers a warning on perfectly valid code just by adding an include:

include std/map.e 
?compare(1,0) 

Perfectly valid code can also contain constructs that trigger warnings. Why do you think that a warning means that you don't have valid code? A warning is NOT an error. A warning is a warning.

Yes, the code above is valid and it can trigger a warning.

You want to get rid of the warning? Sure ... try these ...

include std/map.e 
?eu:compare(1,0) -- Use the predefined 'eu' namespace  
without warning -- avoid all warnings 
include std/map.e 
?compare(1,0) 
without warning &=(builtin_chosen) -- avoid just the "builtin_chosen" warning. 
include std/map.e 
?compare(1,0)  

Note that adding a namespace qualifier on the include std/map.e will not avoid this warning because Euphoria still can't be certain which "compare" you are trying to reference. You have to use a namespace on the actual reference itself to disambiguate it.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

5. Re: namespace bug?

DerekParnell said...
useless said...

I just heard a rumour that a user function name which is the same name as a builtin name will clash even if namespacing is used to clarify which function is being specified. Then i heard people knew about it, and voted to allow this to continue. And people who knew about it kept it hushed up.

Are the rumours correct?

And Area51 really does have a martian spaceship.

OMG, where do you guys get or dream up these ideas???

If namespaces are used then the clash can be resolved.

There is no one "hushing" up anything. And there is nothing to "hush" up anyway.

Sheesh!!! sad

From a couple dev's in #euphoria.

useless

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

6. Re: namespace bug?

useless said...

From a couple dev's in #euphoria.

Um, no one said anything about hushing things up getlost

Jeremy

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

7. Re: namespace bug?

jeremy said...
useless said...

From a couple dev's in #euphoria.

Um, no one said anything about hushing things up getlost

Jeremy

It turns out the dev's in #euphoria were even more confused. tongue

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

8. Re: namespace bug?

jimcbrown said...
jeremy said...
useless said...

From a couple dev's in #euphoria.

Um, no one said anything about hushing things up getlost

Jeremy

It turns out the dev's in #euphoria were even more confused. tongue

Thanks for clearing this up!

useless

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

9. Re: namespace bug?

useless said...
DerekParnell said...
useless said...

I just heard a rumour that a user function name which is the same name as a builtin name will clash even if namespacing is used to clarify which function is being specified. Then i heard people knew about it, and voted to allow this to continue. And people who knew about it kept it hushed up.

Are the rumours correct?

And Area51 really does have a martian spaceship.

OMG, where do you guys get or dream up these ideas???

If namespaces are used then the clash can be resolved.

There is no one "hushing" up anything. And there is nothing to "hush" up anyway.

Sheesh!!! sad

From a couple dev's in #euphoria.

useless

Well like most conspiracy theories, this one was false too. It seems to have been based on the usual mixture of misunderstanding and accidental misinformation.

Someone thought that this namespace thing would cause a compiler error and when they found out that it had been changed to be just a warning now, he was not aware of any discussion or reason behind the change (even though he approves of the change). No hushing up involved, just a missed message many months ago.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

10. Re: namespace bug?

I have experienced NO bugs in namespace on ver 4

In fact ver 4 has uncovered hidden bugs in MY code that ran perfectly happy on ver 3.11.

There is no reason fear using ver 4.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu