Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!geac!alias!rae
From: rae@alias.com (Reid Ellis)
Subject: Re: "module" facility for top-level namespace control
Message-ID: <1991May3.183328.16900@alias.com>
Sender: news@alias.com (USENET News)
Organization: Alias Research, Inc. Toronto ON Canada
References: <1991Apr25.060721.12694@alias.com> <RAEBURN.91Apr26165646@watch.mit.edu> <1991Apr29.174033.29627@alias.com> <1991Apr30.202357.13791@kestrel.edu>
Date: Fri, 3 May 91 18:33:28 GMT

Reid Ellis (that's me) <rae@alias.com> writes:
|Why don't we simply use a syntax which already evokes this concept --
|using "extern"?
|
|extern NIH {
|#include <NIHCL.h>
|};


Scott Layson Burson <gyro@kestrel.edu> writes:
|someone who
|misspelled a type name following `extern' wouldn't find out about it
|until link time, and rather indirectly at that.

Yeah, oh well.

|Besides, the namespace construct *doesn't* mean that the stuff between
|the braces is `extern'.  So I would still prefer the keyword
|`namespace'.

Well, in a last-ditch attempt to avoid a new keyword :-) how about the
following?

extern default NIH {
#include <NIHCL.h>
};

Someone mentioned also using "default" by itself, comme ca:

default NIH {
#include <NIHCL.h>
};

But the word "default" on its own doesn't imply to me that we're
labelling a namespace.  But then again..  Thoughts?  Who mentioned
this use of "default"?

Whatever is decided, would hope that these things nest.  i.e.,
assuming we use "default" on its own:

	default ABC {
	  default XYZ {
	    struct foo {
	      static int bar;
	    };
	  };
	};

	int ABC::XYZ::foo::bar = 23;

Of course, unlike everything else, this proposal will require changes
to the linker.  Will this make it less acceptable to the ANSI
committee?  Can anyone think of a way to do this sans linker changes?
I can't.
						Reid
--
Reid Ellis
rae@utcs.toronto.edu        ||               rae@alias.com
CDA0610@applelink.apple.com ||      +1 416 362 9181 [work]