[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167 Martin Nowak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #9 from Martin Nowak --- (In reply to Kenji Hara from comment #6) > (In reply to Martin Nowak from comment #0) > > version (X86_64) > > alias ulong CARD64; > > > > static if (true) > > alias ulong CARD64; > > @Martin Is there any reasons that you cannot remove the alias repetition? Nope, as I said initially > It might indeed be treated as conflict but it used to work with 2.068.2 I found this in a often used dub binding for X11 and made a PR to fix it. https://github.com/nomad-software/x11/pull/12 --
[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167 --- Comment #8 from Kenji Hara --- (In reply to Walter Bright from comment #7) > Note that one does always control the > declarations within a module, so there's no reason to allow this. Make sense to me. I'll close my PR, and wait the answer for my comment #6 question. --
[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167
--- Comment #7 from Walter Bright ---
(In reply to Kenji Hara from comment #5)
> (In reply to Kenji Hara from comment #3)
> > Because today, two different alias declarations aliasing an identical type
> > are allowed if they're accessed beyond the import boundaries.
>
> Identical symbol aliases are also allowed via imports.
That's right, and that must be supported, because one doesn't necessarily
control the declarations in imports.
> So, I think the
> following case would also need to be supported.
>
> int a15167;
> alias Var15167 = a15167;
> alias Var15167 = a15167;
>
> void f15167() {}
> alias Foo15167 = f15167;
> alias Func15167 = Foo15167;
> alias Func15167 = f15167;
I don't believe that follows, and I can't think of a valid use case for it that
doesn't look like a bug. Note that one does always control the declarations
within a module, so there's no reason to allow this.
--
[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167 --- Comment #6 from Kenji Hara --- (In reply to Martin Nowak from comment #0) > version (X86_64) > alias ulong CARD64; > > static if (true) > alias ulong CARD64; @Martin Is there any reasons that you cannot remove the alias repetition? Currently any identical aliases of unoverloadable entities (type, and unoverloadable symbols - variable, module, package, import, template and instance) just always conflict in a scope. --
[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167
--- Comment #5 from Kenji Hara ---
(In reply to Kenji Hara from comment #3)
> Because today, two different alias declarations aliasing an identical type
> are allowed if they're accessed beyond the import boundaries.
Identical symbol aliases are also allowed via imports. So, I think the
following case would also need to be supported.
int a15167;
alias Var15167 = a15167;
alias Var15167 = a15167;
void f15167() {}
alias Foo15167 = f15167;
alias Func15167 = Foo15167;
alias Func15167 = f15167;
--
[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167 Kenji Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull --- Comment #4 from Kenji Hara --- Implemented. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/5169 --
[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167 --- Comment #3 from Kenji Hara --- (In reply to Walter Bright from comment #2) > Is there a compelling reason to allow: > >alias a = int; >alias a = int; > > ? I can't think of one. The CARD64 example also looks like invalid code that > happened to be accepted. Because today, two different alias declarations aliasing an identical type are allowed if they're accessed beyond the import boundaries. module a; alias ulong CARD64; module b; alias ulong CARD64; module test; import a, b; pragma(msg, CARD64); // OK, ulong is printed (It's handled in ScopeDsymbol.search.) So, if there's no ambiguous, I think accepting such the code would be reasonable. --
[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #2 from Walter Bright --- Is there a compelling reason to allow: alias a = int; alias a = int; ? I can't think of one. The CARD64 example also looks like invalid code that happened to be accepted. --
[Issue 15167] [REG2.069-devel] conflicting error with repeated alias declaration
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15167 Kenji Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[Reg 2.069-devel] |[REG2.069-devel] |conflicting error with |conflicting error with |repeated alias declaration |repeated alias declaration --- Comment #1 from Kenji Hara --- Introduced in: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/4816 > It might indeed be treated as conflict but it used to work with 2.068.2 as > long as one of the aliases is within a static if. Yes, it was a bug and fixed as issue 13203. If we will accept the snippet code as valid, it would need additional rule for the overloaded alias declarations: - If two overloaded alias declarations are aliases of an identical type, they don't conflict. // simplest example case alias a = int; alias a = int; // identical, no conflict alias b = int: alias b = const int; // not identical, conflict How about that? --
