C++Talk.NET C++ language newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  struct foo and function foo !?          C++Talk.NET Forum Index -> C++ language (comp.lang.c++) View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Razvan Guest Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 4:28 pm    Post subject: struct foo and function foo !? Hi ! Today I saw some code like this: struct foo { foo(foo* s2){ cout << "foo::foo"; } }; foo* foo(foo *s2) { cout << "foo::(foo*)"; return s2; } The name of the struct is 'foo' and the name of the function is 'foo' also ! Why they are not conflicting ? The name of types and the names of functions (and varialbles) are kept in separate places ? Is this standard behaviour ? Regards, Razvan Back to top Razvan Guest Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2004 6:04 pm    Post subject: Re: struct foo and function foo !? Tough question ?!! Maybe somebody can pinpoint me to the right direction. Razvan [email]mihai11 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com[/email] (Razvan) wrote in message news:<15f19d61.0406260828.7cc55 (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>... Quote: Hi ! Today I saw some code like this: struct foo { foo(foo* s2){ cout << "foo::foo"; } }; foo* foo(foo *s2) { cout << "foo::(foo*)"; return s2; } The name of the struct is 'foo' and the name of the function is 'foo' also ! Why they are not conflicting ? The name of types and the names of functions (and varialbles) are kept in separate places ? Is this standard behaviour ? Regards, Razvan Back to top Denis Remezov Guest Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:12 pm    Post subject: Re: struct foo and function foo !? Prateek R Karandikar wrote: Quote: Today I saw some code like this: struct foo { foo(foo* s2){ cout << "foo::foo"; } }; foo* foo(foo *s2) { cout << "foo::(foo*)"; return s2; } The name of the struct is 'foo' and the name of the function is 'foo' also ! Why they are not conflicting ? The name of types and the names of functions (and varialbles) are kept in separate places ? Is this standard behaviour ? Yes, unfotunately this is Standard behaviour. A struct and a function in the same scope can have the same name. It is one of the unwanted leftovers of the C language. In C, foo wouldn't be a type, struct foo would be a type, so there was no ambiguity. In C++ now foo itself is a type, but the committee chose not to break C compatibility in this case. However it is best to avoid this "feature". A good compiler should give a warning. Just to add, a function declaration or definition will hide the name of a class /in the same scope/ (now you would need to say "struct foo" in order to get down to the name of the /struct/ foo). An interesting part is the function declarator itself: foo* foo(foo* s2) Here, foo* is still considered a pointer to struct foo since the declaration of function foo is not yet complete. If I were not able to change the names, I would use "struct foo" here too; otherwise, a forward declaration of function foo would cause a compilation error in the definition. Denis Back to top Prateek R Karandikar Guest Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:09 am    Post subject: Re: struct foo and function foo !? Quote: Today I saw some code like this: struct foo { foo(foo* s2){ cout << "foo::foo"; } }; foo* foo(foo *s2) { cout << "foo::(foo*)"; return s2; } The name of the struct is 'foo' and the name of the function is 'foo' also ! Why they are not conflicting ? The name of types and the names of functions (and varialbles) are kept in separate places ? Is this standard behaviour ? Yes, unfotunately this is Standard behaviour. A struct and a function in the same scope can have the same name. It is one of the unwanted leftovers of the C language. In C, foo wouldn't be a type, struct foo would be a type, so there was no ambiguity. In C++ now foo itself is a type, but the committee chose not to break C compatibility in this case. However it is best to avoid this "feature". A good compiler should give a warning. -- -- Abstraction is selective ignorance. -Andrew Koenig -- -- Back to top Razvan Guest Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:45 am    Post subject: Re: struct foo and function foo !? [email]kprateek88 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com[/email] (Prateek R Karandikar) wrote in message news:<607f883e.0406271709.7c427a4a (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>... Quote: Today I saw some code like this: struct foo { foo(foo* s2){ cout << "foo::foo"; } }; foo* foo(foo *s2) { cout << "foo::(foo*)"; return s2; } The name of the struct is 'foo' and the name of the function is 'foo' also ! Why they are not conflicting ? The name of types and the names of functions (and varialbles) are kept in separate places ? Is this standard behaviour ? Yes, unfotunately this is Standard behaviour. A struct and a function in the same scope can have the same name. It is one of the unwanted leftovers of the C language. In C, foo wouldn't be a type, struct foo would be a type, so there was no ambiguity. In C++ now foo itself is a type, but the committee chose not to break C compatibility in this case. However it is best to avoid this "feature". A good compiler should give a warning. Why are you saying that the function 'foo' is a type ? That makes no sense to me. What king of variables can you define with this type ?!! Regards, Razvan Back to top Richard Herring Guest Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 12:37 pm    Post subject: Re: struct foo and function foo !? In message <15f19d61.0406280045.4783fcd0 (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>, Razvan <mihai11 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> writes Quote: kprateek88 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com (Prateek R Karandikar) wrote in message news:<607f883e.0406271709.7c427a4a (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>... Today I saw some code like this: struct foo { foo(foo* s2){ cout << "foo::foo"; } }; foo* foo(foo *s2) { cout << "foo::(foo*)"; return s2; } The name of the struct is 'foo' and the name of the function is 'foo' also ! Why they are not conflicting ? The name of types and the names of functions (and varialbles) are kept in separate places ? Is this standard behaviour ? Yes, unfotunately this is Standard behaviour. A struct and a function in the same scope can have the same name. It is one of the unwanted leftovers of the C language. In C, foo wouldn't be a type, struct foo would be a type, so there was no ambiguity. In C++ now foo itself is a type, but the committee chose not to break C compatibility in this case. However it is best to avoid this "feature". A good compiler should give a warning. Why are you saying that the function 'foo' is a type ? That makes no sense to me. What king of variables can you define with this type ?!! Variables of type "pointer to {function taking one argument of type foo* and returning a foo*}". -- Richard Herring Back to top John Harrison Guest Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 12:49 pm    Post subject: Re: struct foo and function foo !? "Razvan" <mihai11 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote Quote: kprateek88 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com (Prateek R Karandikar) wrote in message news:<607f883e.0406271709.7c427a4a (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>... Today I saw some code like this: struct foo { foo(foo* s2){ cout << "foo::foo"; } }; foo* foo(foo *s2) { cout << "foo::(foo*)"; return s2; } The name of the struct is 'foo' and the name of the function is 'foo' also ! Why they are not conflicting ? The name of types and the names of functions (and varialbles) are kept in separate places ? Is this standard behaviour ? Yes, unfotunately this is Standard behaviour. A struct and a function in the same scope can have the same name. It is one of the unwanted leftovers of the C language. In C, foo wouldn't be a type, struct foo would be a type, so there was no ambiguity. In C++ now foo itself is a type, but the committee chose not to break C compatibility in this case. However it is best to avoid this "feature". A good compiler should give a warning. Why are you saying that the function 'foo' is a type ? That makes no sense to me. What king of variables can you define with this type ?!! function foo is not a type, struct foo is a type. john Back to top Razvan Guest Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:26 pm    Post subject: Re: struct foo and function foo !? Hi ! int someFunc (int a) { return a + 2; } In order to declare a pointer to such a func you can use: typedef int (*ptr_to_func) (int); This is how you define a type of pointer to some function. Then you can write: ptr_to_func pFunc = someFunc; int rr = 10; cout << pFunc(rr) << endl; "someFunc" is not a type therefore you cannot use it like the type ptr_to_func is used. Regards, Razvan Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         C++Talk.NET Forum Index -> C++ language (comp.lang.c++) All times are GMT Page 1 of 1   Jump to: Select a forum C/C++----------------C LanguageC Language (Moderated)C++ Language (Moderated)C++ language (comp.lang.c++)C++ language, library and standards Non-English C/C++ Newsgroups----------------C++ (German)C++ (French)  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.