I understand the general use case, but I think this case is very confusing and
should be flagged. Simplified version: (play in :
<https://play.nim-lang.org/#ix=2yIv> )
type SomeJob = object
id: string
# one order
proc process1[J](job: J): string = "generic value"
echo process1(SomeJob(id: "1"))
proc process1(job: SomeJob): string = "some value"
echo process1(SomeJob(id: "1"))
# reordered
proc process2[J](job: J): string = "generic value"
proc process2(job: SomeJob): string = "some value"
echo process2(SomeJob(id: "1"))
echo process2(SomeJob(id: "1"))
Run
The output produced is:
generic value
some value
some value
some value
Run
Moving the "echo" past the 2nd proc definition changes the output. I would
expect at least a warning in this case, because even though the ambiguous match
IS resolved to the more specific version, as one would expect, both are
instantiated and used in the same scope, and which one exactly is used in each
case depends on things like macro expansions etc, which are not self evident.
I would expect reordering of lines to make it compile/not compile because of a
future reference, but not the output to change.
Furthermore, with the planned code-reordering that would remove the need for
forward declarations, the meaning of the 1st order in the example may change on
reordering.
