On Fri, 23 Aug 2024, at 13:43, Stephen Reay wrote:
> This change would also break existing code that does "the right thing", 
> and has the potential to arbitrarily break perfectly valid userland 
> code *any time a new global function is added*, forever. 

You replied to me, but you seem to be commenting on one of the other proposals. 
My preference is for "unqualified = global", which is a one-off breaking 
change, which only affects user-defined functions, which are declared in a 
namespace, and used in that same namespace.

You're right that it would mean classes and functions resolve differently, and 
that's why I said that if I had a time machine, I would support a different 
option. But, personally, I don't think the small long-term inconsistency 
outweighs the huge short-term disruption of defaulting to local.

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]

Reply via email to