El 05/10/2016 a las 9:23, Graeme Geldenhuys escribió: > On 2016-10-05 08:11, LacaK wrote: >> Now I understand what happens, but isn't it bit confusing ? > Yup, I would agree, and if possible, one should be removed.
Yes and no. Yes, probably in this case one of them should be removed, but the reason of why it's confusing is still there. If you declare two functions with identical name in the same unit, you get a "redeclared" error, unless you add the overload directive. If you declare two functions with identical name in the different units, the second "used" unit overrides, hides, the first declaration without any warning. This behavior sometimes leads unexpected compiler errors that stops you saying "what the...#@&?" for some time. Sometimes minutes, sometimes until people get an answer from a forum . Handle types are a common case. And compiler errors are the nice case, if there are not compiler errors because the both declarations are compatibles, you get unexpected behaviors that drives you nuts, like this case I think that "automatic overriding" is a wrong design from the first turbo pascal and should be fixed. The need of overriding system functions like memory managers is a corner case to treat, not a reason to not solve the unexpected hide of declarations. -- Saludos Santiago A. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
