Re: Namespaces bug

Couldn't you make the same argument for: function A() { function B() { } } This has worked for years and both A() and B() become global functions. -Rasmus On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, Andrei Zmievski wrote: > Care to explain a little more? I think allowing this syntax is very > confusing for the user. > > I can see the point of this: > > namespace A { > class B { > ... > } > } > > ... > > namespace A { > class C { > ... > } > } > > But not in the example below. People would basically expect to have > nested namespaces, which we don't have, so why lead them on? > > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > Noting to fix. This is by design. > > > > AZ>> namespace A { > > AZ>> namespace B{ > > AZ>> class C { > > AZ>> function D() { print "asdf\n"; } > > AZ>> } > > AZ>> } > > AZ>> > > AZ>> } > > AZ>> > > AZ>> B::C::D(); > > AZ>> > > AZ>> Apparently, the parser allows nesting namespaces, but they are all > > AZ>> registered as global ones. Should be fixed, I think. > > -Andrei > http://www.gravitonic.com/ > * The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from. * > >