• Bob W (11/11) Feb 18 2005 In reference to compiler message:
• Norbert Nemec (7/21) Feb 19 2005 Why not use an alias? The whole point of a good module system is, that
• Ben Hinkle (3/24) Feb 19 2005 That would work but looking at the floor() in std.date it looks to me li...
• Bob W (3/31) Feb 19 2005 I fully agree.

"Bob W" <nospam aol.com> writes:

In reference to compiler message:

"function std.math.floor conflicts with std.date.floor ..."

The floor functions in std.math and std.date are
colliding with each other, thus requiring the
necessity to use "std.math.floor(x)" instead
of "floor(x)" in certain cases. I'd call this a
major nuicance, especially when porting certain
C programs to D.

How about renaming the "floor" function in
std.date, since it is not even mentioned in the
Phobos docs?

Norbert Nemec <Norbert Nemec-online.de> writes:

Bob W schrieb:
 In reference to compiler message:
 
 "function std.math.floor conflicts with std.date.floor ..."
 
 The floor functions in std.math and std.date are
 colliding with each other, thus requiring the
 necessity to use "std.math.floor(x)" instead
 of "floor(x)" in certain cases. I'd call this a
 major nuicance, especially when porting certain
 C programs to D.
 
 How about renaming the "floor" function in
 std.date, since it is not even mentioned in the
 Phobos docs?

Why not use an alias? The whole point of a good module system is, that 
it separates symbols into namespaces and allows solving conflicts in an 
easy way.

(Even better would be, of course, if conflicting routines from different 
modules were automatically handled as overloads of each other. I think 
that issue was discussed before?)

Ben Hinkle <Ben_member pathlink.com> writes:

In article <cv74jf$24d3$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Norbert Nemec says...
Bob W schrieb:
 In reference to compiler message:
 
 "function std.math.floor conflicts with std.date.floor ..."
 
 The floor functions in std.math and std.date are
 colliding with each other, thus requiring the
 necessity to use "std.math.floor(x)" instead
 of "floor(x)" in certain cases. I'd call this a
 major nuicance, especially when porting certain
 C programs to D.
 
 How about renaming the "floor" function in
 std.date, since it is not even mentioned in the
 Phobos docs?

Why not use an alias? The whole point of a good module system is, that 
it separates symbols into namespaces and allows solving conflicts in an 
easy way.

(Even better would be, of course, if conflicting routines from different 
modules were automatically handled as overloads of each other. I think 
that issue was discussed before?)

That would work but looking at the floor() in std.date it looks to me like it
should be private.

"Bob W" <nospam aol.com> writes:

"Ben Hinkle" <Ben_member pathlink.com> wrote in message 
news:cv7d9m$2eut$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <cv74jf$24d3$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Norbert Nemec says...
Bob W schrieb:
 In reference to compiler message:

 "function std.math.floor conflicts with std.date.floor ..."

 The floor functions in std.math and std.date are
 colliding with each other, thus requiring the
 necessity to use "std.math.floor(x)" instead
 of "floor(x)" in certain cases. I'd call this a
 major nuicance, especially when porting certain
 C programs to D.

 How about renaming the "floor" function in
 std.date, since it is not even mentioned in the
 Phobos docs?

Why not use an alias? The whole point of a good module system is, that
it separates symbols into namespaces and allows solving conflicts in an
easy way.

(Even better would be, of course, if conflicting routines from different
modules were automatically handled as overloads of each other. I think
that issue was discussed before?)

 That would work but looking at the floor() in std.date it looks to me like 
 it
 should be private.

I fully agree.