Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.glorb.com!news-out.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From: noitalmost <noitalmost@cox.net>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: How to handle qualified identifiers such as x.y in a Pascal-like language
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:13:32 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
Lines: 44
Sender: news@iecc.com
Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID: <11-06-050@comp.compilers>
References: <11-06-037@comp.compilers> <11-06-046@comp.compilers> <11-06-047@comp.compilers>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com
X-Trace: gal.iecc.com 1309370660 14405 64.57.183.58 (29 Jun 2011 18:04:20 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:04:20 +0000 (UTC)
Keywords: symbols, storage
Posted-Date: 29 Jun 2011 14:04:20 EDT
X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.compilers:176

On Saturday, June 25, 2011 06:55:06 am Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
> IMO qualifiers should allow to address identifiers in *external* (here:
> outer) scopes, which otherwise would be hidden by a local identifier of
> the same name.

For my language, this is my intention.

> A more elaborate example:
>
> program P;
> var P;
> var x;
> procedure P;
>    var P: RecordContainingX;
>    var x;
>    procedure P;
>      var x;
>      ... P.x ...
>      ... P.P.x ...
>    end; //inner P
>    ... P.x ... //x in var P or in outer procedure P?
		# should be x in the record var P
>    ... P() ... //recursive or local procedure call?
		# local call

My language's scopes for this program would have the following symbols:
global scope:
	P # the program
program P's scope:
	P, x	# variables
	P	# procedure
procedure P's scope:
	P	# record containing x
	x
	P	# procedure
inner procedure P's scope:
	x

Thanks for this example. It has helped me to consider some additional cases. I
never thought about the recursive vs. local call of P() in the above.

I'm parsing the dots left to right, which seems like it will give the results
I desire.