Re: Modified Interpreter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Kachan" <kinz at peterlink.ru>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Re: Modified Interpreter
>
>
> Hello Derek,
>
>
> [big snip]
> > I take it back. Now I'm *sure* you have no understanding of the rules.
>
> What rules, official rules, or Matt's rules?
> I understand both, but I do not like them both.
The RDS rules, as that's all we are talking about here with your example.
> > It seems that you are saying that Euphoria should issue
> > an error message when the b.e file tries to declare a
> > global 'z', because a.e has already defined 'z'.
>
> No, not just 'z' , but because a.e has already defined *GLOBAL* 'z'.
I'm sorry that I left out the (obvious) word 'global'. Of course I was talking
about the global 'z' as there is no local 'z' in a.e.
> I think, there must be an error message or a warning message, yes,
> from the b.e file.
>
> > Is this the problem that you see?
>
> With my corrections, yes it is.
Your point of view seems to be then, that global symbols must be unique within
an entire program.
This option is only practical if you do not use other people's include files -
such that you don't mind changing include file code whenever you need to resolve
a conflict of global symbols.
If, however, you want to freely use other people's include files, without the
worry of clashing names, then your position is a hardship that I would rather
avoid.
--
Derek
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
