OpenEuphoria

Re: Name-space proposal

• Posted by jacques deschênes <desja at globetro?te?.net> Aug 03, 2007
• 493 views

Hi Robert,
I tested it and that is true. I confounded that situation with this one:

--test.e
global constant test=123

--test2.e
global constant test=345

--main.ex
include test.e
include test2.e
? test

which result in this:
C:\Temp\main.ex:3
A namespace qualifier is needed to resolve test.
test is defined as a global symbol in:
    c:\temp\test.e
    c:\temp\test2.e



regards,
Jacques Deschênes

Robert Craig wrote:
> 
> jacques deschênes wrote:
> > this is a reasonable proposal, I back it. What is in the main file of a
> > program
> > should have priority than what is in include in case of redefinition.
> 
> That's how it *does* work.
> 
> If a symbol is defined in the same file 
> where the reference to it occurs, 
> that symbol will be used, regardless of what
> is defined in other included files. It has been that
> way ever since 2.3 when the namespace feature 
> was first introduced.
> 
> Bernie must be using version 2.2 or earlier,
> where namespaces didn't even exist.
>  
> > Bernie Ryan wrote:
> > > 
> > > Anybody:
> > > 
> > > If name-space worked in this way it would solve a lot of problems.
> > > 
> > > If a program contains a function foo()in the local main file and another
> > > 
> > > file is included containing a foo() function. The interpeter would not
> > > 
> > > stop but continue using the foo() function in the local main file.
> > > 
> > > When the program ends; the program would issue a warning that there
> > > 
> > > is a duplicate function foo() exists in include file xxx.e just
> > > 
> > > as it lists unused constants etc.
> > > 
> > > This would eliminate breaking code and allow debugging.
> > > 
> > > There could also be a special flag Example: with_out_name_space
> > > 
> > > to turn this on/off 
> > > 
> > > Bernie
> 
> Regards,
>    Rob Craig
>    Rapid Deployment Software
>    <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>