Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why are typedef names in the same name space as variable names?
Message-ID: <5435@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 6-Dec-86 11:51:10 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.5435
Posted: Sat Dec  6 11:51:10 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 7-Dec-86 22:11:57 EST
References: <1092@spice.cs.cmu.edu> <307@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> <1063@ihdev.UUCP> <7374@utzoo.UUCP> <6430@alice.uUCp>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 22

In article <6430@alice.uUCp> bs@alice.UUCP writes:
>file1:
>	typedef int I;
>	I i = 1;
>file2:
>	typedef char* I;
>	I p = "asdf";
>Is it legal? Personally, I think not because the name I which is external by
>default has two definitions (but the C++ compiler also accepts it).

I see no more reason to consider the abbreviation `I' external than
to do so for `COUNTER' in the following scenario:
file1:
	#define COUNTER int
	COUNTER i = 1;
file2:
	#define COUNTER long
	COUNTER l = 0;
It appears to depend on whether one considers typedef to be a convenient
shorthand or something more fundamental.  If you adopt your view, then
one needs to allow declarations such as:
	static typedef int I;