• clayasaurus (16/16) Jun 10 2005 The following code compiles fine and crashes. I think it should produce
• Walter (4/6) Jun 10 2005 Being able to redeclare names inside scopes is the whole point of having
• Hasan Aljudy (5/16) Jun 10 2005 Yeah, the problem here isn't exactly scope, it's the use of an
• clayasaurus (18/29) Jun 11 2005 I guess my main problem is that, I wasn't able to use an assert to catch...
• clayasaurus (2/41) Jun 11 2005
• James McComb (5/7) Jun 11 2005 It does produce an error, but only if you use the -w compiler switch.
• clayasaurus (3/16) Jun 11 2005 Erm... that just means it wants a return 0 at the end of main, which
• James McComb (3/5) Jun 11 2005 Right you are. I must have had a brain malfunction. ;)
• clayasaurus (2/11) Jun 11 2005 I've had plenty of those too lately :-/

clayasaurus <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

The following code compiles fine and crashes. I think it should produce 
an error that foo is already defined? It took a while for me to catch it.

class Foo
{
    void dostuff() {}
}

Foo foo;

void init()
{
    Foo foo = new Foo;
}

int main()
{
    init();

    foo.dostuff();
}

"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:

"clayasaurus" <clayasaurus gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d8dsit$2nft$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 The following code compiles fine and crashes. I think it should produce
 an error that foo is already defined?

Being able to redeclare names inside scopes is the whole point of having
scopes.

Hasan Aljudy <hasan.aljudy gmail.com> writes:

Walter wrote:
 "clayasaurus" <clayasaurus gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:d8dsit$2nft$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 
The following code compiles fine and crashes. I think it should produce
an error that foo is already defined?

 
 
 Being able to redeclare names inside scopes is the whole point of having
 scopes.
 
 

Yeah, the problem here isn't exactly scope, it's the use of an 
un-initialized variable.
Shouldn't that produce some sort of error? (I read that the compiler 
doesn't produce warnings; it's either an error or not).

clayasaurus <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

Walter wrote:
 "clayasaurus" <clayasaurus gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:d8dsit$2nft$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 
The following code compiles fine and crashes. I think it should produce
an error that foo is already defined?

 
 
 Being able to redeclare names inside scopes is the whole point of having
 scopes.
 
 

I guess my main problem is that, I wasn't able to use an assert to catch it!

class Foo
{
    void dostuff() {}
}

Foo foo;

void init()
{
    Foo foo = new Foo;
}

int main()
{
    init();

    assert(foo is null);
    foo.dostuff();
}

Shouldn't this through an assert error? *confused*

clayasaurus <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

nevermind.

clayasaurus wrote:
 Walter wrote:
 
 "clayasaurus" <clayasaurus gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:d8dsit$2nft$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 The following code compiles fine and crashes. I think it should produce
 an error that foo is already defined?



 Being able to redeclare names inside scopes is the whole point of having
 scopes.

 
 I guess my main problem is that, I wasn't able to use an assert to catch 
 it!
 
 class Foo
 {
    void dostuff() {}
 }
 
 Foo foo;
 
 void init()
 {
    Foo foo = new Foo;
 }
 
 int main()
 {
    init();
 
    assert(foo is null);
    foo.dostuff();
 }
 
 Shouldn't this through an assert error? *confused*

James McComb <alan jamesmccomb.id.au> writes:

clayasaurus wrote:

 The following code compiles fine and crashes. I think it should produce 
 an error that foo is already defined? It took a while for me to catch it.

It does produce an error, but only if you use the -w compiler switch.

You'll get the following warning:
function main no return at end of function

James McComb

clayasaurus <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

James McComb wrote:
 clayasaurus wrote:
 
 The following code compiles fine and crashes. I think it should 
 produce an error that foo is already defined? It took a while for me 
 to catch it.

 
 
 It does produce an error, but only if you use the -w compiler switch.
 
 You'll get the following warning:
 function main no return at end of function
 
 James McComb

Erm... that just means it wants a return 0 at the end of main, which 
wasn't my problem.

James McComb <alan jamesmccomb.id.au> writes:

clayasaurus wrote:

 Erm... that just means it wants a return 0 at the end of main, which 
 wasn't my problem.

Right you are. I must have had a brain malfunction. ;)

James McComb

clayasaurus <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

James McComb wrote:
 clayasaurus wrote:
 
 Erm... that just means it wants a return 0 at the end of main, which 
 wasn't my problem.

 
 
 Right you are. I must have had a brain malfunction. ;)
 
 James McComb

I've had plenty of those too lately :-/