www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - Modules named "object" with DMD 0.153

reply Chris Nicholson-Sauls <ibisbasenji gmail.com> writes:
It isn't perfect, but it appears there is now a way to have modules named
'object' or at 
least according to a cheap little test I just ran.  The trick is to explicitly
import 
'object' in your own 'object'.  Let me show you what I mean:




















This compiles and runs fine for me, DMD 0.153 on Windows.

-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls
Apr 11 2006
parent reply Hasan Aljudy <hasan.aljudy gmail.com> writes:
Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:

 It isn't perfect, but it appears there is now a way to have modules 
 named 'object' or at least according to a cheap little test I just ran.  
 The trick is to explicitly import 'object' in your own 'object'.  Let me 
 show you what I mean:
 










 







 
 This compiles and runs fine for me, DMD 0.153 on Windows.
 
 -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls


but this module is foo.object, which is totally different from object.

There shouldn't be a problem with creating a module foo.object, it 
wouldn't conflict with object anyway. At least that's what I think.
Apr 11 2006
next sibling parent reply AgentOrange <AgentOrange_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <e1i6gi$14oj$2 digitaldaemon.com>, Hasan Aljudy says...

Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:

 It isn't perfect, but it appears there is now a way to have modules 
 named 'object' or at least according to a cheap little test I just ran.  
 The trick is to explicitly import 'object' in your own 'object'.  Let me 
 show you what I mean:
 










 







 
 This compiles and runs fine for me, DMD 0.153 on Windows.
 
 -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls


but this module is foo.object, which is totally different from object.

There shouldn't be a problem with creating a module foo.object, it 
wouldn't conflict with object anyway. At least that's what I think.



I think the original problem was you cannot declare a class with the name Object
Apr 12 2006
parent Chris Nicholson-Sauls <ibisbasenji gmail.com> writes:
AgentOrange wrote:

 In article <e1i6gi$14oj$2 digitaldaemon.com>, Hasan Aljudy says...
 

Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:


It isn't perfect, but it appears there is now a way to have modules 
named 'object' or at least according to a cheap little test I just ran.  
The trick is to explicitly import 'object' in your own 'object'.  Let me 
show you what I mean:




















This compiles and runs fine for me, DMD 0.153 on Windows.

-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls


but this module is foo.object, which is totally different from object.

There shouldn't be a problem with creating a module foo.object, it 
wouldn't conflict with object anyway. At least that's what I think.


 
 
 
 I think the original problem was you cannot declare a class with the name
Object
 
 
 


You can, however, declare a class named foo.object.Object, or even just
foo.Object.  You 
just have to be very careful about the declerations of other classes in modules
that 
import your module declaring an "Object" class.  In other words, in any module
importing 
"foo" (which declares "Object") you cannot declare "orphan" classes because
they are 
actually silently declared as children of ".Object".  Now, it is possible that
one could 
now do this:
















-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls
Apr 12 2006
prev sibling parent Chris Nicholson-Sauls <ibisbasenji gmail.com> writes:
Hasan Aljudy wrote:

 Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:
 

 It isn't perfect, but it appears there is now a way to have modules 
 named 'object' or at least according to a cheap little test I just 
 ran.  The trick is to explicitly import 'object' in your own 
 'object'.  Let me show you what I mean:




















 This compiles and runs fine for me, DMD 0.153 on Windows.

 -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls


 
 
 but this module is foo.object, which is totally different from object.
 
 There shouldn't be a problem with creating a module foo.object, it 
 wouldn't conflict with object anyway. At least that's what I think.


It didn't use to matter.  A project of mine, codename Lyra, had a module named 
"lyra.db.object" which caused the problem to show itself.  I ended up renaming
it to 
"lyra.db.lobject" (note the "l" prefix) to get around it, and renamed the
contained class 
to "LObject" as well.

I would not expect having a local (ie, not under any package at all) "object"
module to 
/EVER/ work, because the standard library "object" module is not under any
package, 
therefore the two will /ALWAYS/ conflict in name, no matter what one might do. 
(I still 
say the solution is to move the standard "object" to "std.object" and be happy.)

-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls
Apr 12 2006