On Thursday, 10 January 2013 at 08:35:14 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 09:07:49 deadalnix wrote:
Consider also that this is yet another inconsistency, which is
a
bad thing in itself.
What inconsistency? There's no inconsistency here. Is it that
you think that
the fact that the local variable shadows the member variable is
an
inconsistency? The _only_ case where variable shadowing is
illegal is when one
local variable shadows another local variable, and that's
because you can't
access the shadowed variable when that happens. In all other
cases, you can
access the shadowed variable (be it through the this
pointer/reference or
through . or by using the full import path to the variable).
So, if anything
is inconsistent, it's the fact that shadowing one local
variable with another
is illegal. It's legal with everything else and quite easy to
work around when
it happens.
How many time did you find yourself in a position of where you
say to yourself "how no, I can't access that variable anymore
because it is shadowed !".
And, if this is really the reason, why is this forbidden ?
void foo() {
{
int bar;
}
{
float bar;
}
}
Or are you arguing that something else here is an inconsistent?
Because I
don't see it, and I don't know what else from this thread that
you could
possibly be referring to.
It is sometime allowed to shadow declaration and sometime not.
This is not very consistent. Inconsistency come always at a cost,
so the benefit must be very real to create one.
