Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!cmcl2!yale!husc6!rutgers!lll-crg!mordor!sri-spam!wohler
From: wohler@sri-spam.istc.sri.com (Bill Wohler)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Why are typedef names in the same name space as variable names?
Message-ID: <9612@sri-spam.istc.sri.com>
Date: Tue, 18-Nov-86 01:22:41 EST
Article-I.D.: sri-spam.9612
Posted: Tue Nov 18 01:22:41 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 18-Nov-86 09:19:53 EST
References: <4220@ut-ngp.UUCP> <2183@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU>
Reply-To: wohler@sri-spam.UUCP (Bill Wohler)
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park
Lines: 24
Keywords: typedef variable name space
Xref: mnetor comp.lang.c:82 comp.lang.c++:16

In article <2183@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU> bruss@sdcsvax.UUCP (Brian Russ) writes:
>	If [typedefs and variables] weren't in the same name space,
>	you could, in addition to the above, write:
>
>	struct foo { /* ... */ };
>
>	foo foo;
>
>	Yuch!  Do you really want/need this flexibility?  In my opinion,
>it's better the way it is now.

  i haven't thought of an example which would necessitate having
  typedefs and variables in the same name space.  it is very common
  to have:

struct foo {...};
...
struct foo foo;

  thinking of different names for the structure and the variable
  becomes difficult when we just hack and don't expand our
  vocabulary reading faulkner or didion. ;-)

						--bw