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]