On Thursday, 7 January 2016 at 18:17:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/7/2016 9:02 AM, Carl Sturtivant wrote:
I should have noticed this too; so in fact the current design
can be used
ignoring the scope modeling the C++ namespace. If the details
of using such an
external name in that fashion are identical to any other name
at module scope in
every context, then I therefore concede that the design is OK,
because it may be
treated as the alternative suggested in various ways in this
thread by simply
ignoring the new scope by not using its name.
The idea is most definitely that it follows the usual D scoping
and name lookup rules.
Note that 'alias' works much like symbolic links do in the
Linux filesystem, in that it can make names appear in multiple
scopes without needing qualification.
So what do you make of Manu's last post?
http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.3421.1452230079.22025.digitalmar...@puremagic.com
Specifically, he gives examples of name collisions and scope
problems that apparently could be avoided simply only if there is
no named scope modeling a C++ namespace.
