Jonas wrote: > >> The magic word would be "scope" here. It's the same as with using two > >> different units including the same identifier twice. > > > > Yes and no, of course it will work, but might be counterintuitive. > > > > uses x, a.b.c; > > > > a.b.c.d. > > > > if x also contains an identifier "a". > > > > error : a.b.c.d identifier not found. (but a.b.c.d exists). > > We already print fully qualified identifiers in some error messages > in case confusion is possible (e.g. unit1.type1 expected, but got > unit2.type1).
True, but this is different. To know the cause you have to search further than the first hit, not just detect a mismatch. > PS: could you configure your mail client so it inserts an attribution > line at the top? (it's hard to follow who wrote what) Phew. elmrc is not my favorite, but I'll try to look into it tomorrow _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
