qbit/go
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/golang/go synced 2024-11-11 19:41:36 -07:00
Code Releases Activity

cleaning up bug132

Browse Source 
R=rsc
http://go/go-review/1017012
This commit is contained in:
Robert Griesemer 2009-11-02 09:42:53 -08:00
parent 49d295d592
commit e6f85af2bb
1 changed files with 0 additions and 69 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

69
test/fixedbugs/bug132.go
View File

@ -9,72 +9,3 @@ package main
type T struct {
x, x int // ERROR "duplicate"
}
/*
Accessing obj.x for obj of type T will lead to an error so this cannot
be used in a program, but I would argue that this should be a compile-
tume error at the declaration point.
*/
/* Condensed e-mail thread:
---------- Russ Cox
I don't think this is an error as long as you don't refer to x. I like the fact that you could name
multiple elements in the struct "pad".
---------- Rob 'Commander' Pike to Russ, me, go-dev, reviewlog2
the real question is whether this program matches the spec and if not, which is in error.
---------- Russ Cox to Rob, me, go-dev, reviewlog2
true enough. the spec disagrees with 6g.
when we discussed the disambiguation
rules for anonymous structs i thought we'd
mentioned this issue too and decided the
opposite, but i'm happy to make 6g agree
with the spec.
---------- Robert Griesemer to Russ, Rob, go-dev, reviewlog2
I think the spec could perhaps be more definitive. Note that 6g also accepts:
type T struct {
x int
}
func (p *T) x() {
}
func (p *T) x() {
}
The spec says that the scope of methods and fields is selectors of the form obj.selector. In a scope an identifier can be declared only once. I'd conclude that in the scope of fields and selectors of T, there are multiple x. But it's somewhat indirect. From a programmer's point of view making this an error seems less surprising, at least to me.
---------- Ken Thompson to me, Russ, Rob, go-dev, reviewlog2
obviously i dont think this is an error, or
i would have made it an error. it seems like
a small point if the error comes up at
declaration or use.
---------- Robert Griesemer to Ken, Russ, Rob, go-dev, reviewlog2
I don't really care too much, but I think it should be consistent. The following code:
type T struct {
x int;
}
func (p *T) x() {
}
func (p *T) x(a, b, c int) {
}
does result in an error (method redeclared). I don't quite see why this should behave any different then if both x() had the same parameter list.
PS: I agree that the spec is saying two different things here - or at least should be more precise; the section on selectors (which arguably is the newer section), would allow such a declaration. I suspect that the case below leads to an early error possibly due to some interaction with code that checks for forward declaration of functions/methods (this not having looked at 6g).
I am happy to go either way. It's a small item and we can close it once we all agree.
*/