OpenEuphoria

Re: Let's talk about scope

• Posted by Daniel Berstein <daber at PAIR.COM> Jan 18, 1999
• 467 views

At 11:44 p.m. 17-01-99 -0500, you wrote:
>Ralf's suggestion was to change the scope rule to allow routines in deep
>includes inaccessible.  This would solve my problem, but create others.  I
>think I have included graphics.e file.  I know it includes machine.e.  So,
>in my main file, I call machine.e files without directly including it.  I
>am exploiting the scope rules.  If this new scope rules is implemented, all
>such programs would no longer work.

But you can fix it with a simple include xxx.e

If you follow the library reference there says wich include file contains a
particular routine.Following that guideline there should be NO side
effects.

I totally agree that a more complete namespace mechanism should be
implemented. I particulary like Turbo/Object Pascal unit aproach. Just
name each include file, if there is an identifier conflict you can specify
the include file you actually mean to address. Example:

include myfile.e
integer x
x = myfile.x + 10 -- x is declared in myinclude.e as global

or

include myfile.e
integer x
x =  (x in myfile) + 10

About prohibiting nested include files a solution would be:

include this.e  -- Can't get accessed out of this module
global include that.e   -- Can get accessed out of this module

Regards,
        Daniel   Berstein
        daber at pair.com