 |
 |
Craig Dedo wrote: ... > [...] All of > the vendors that have implemented this extension use the same rule in > cases of ambiguity. In such cases, structure component delimiter takes > precendence over other uses of period, i.e., the period is a structure > component delimiter and **NOT** an operator delimiter. That can't be the rule. The whole purpose of defined operators is to allow the programmer to create operators that work on his derived types. What you mean is that the implementations apply the rule you cite *only* if there's an ambiguity, not that they *always* treat period as a component selector. That is, the string X.Y.Z will be interpreted as a single qualified name if Y is a component name of the X's type, even if .Y. is an operator that's visible in the same context. But, .Y. will be treated as an operator if X's type has no component called Y. Of course, it's just an error if Y is neither an operator nor a component name. Given that clarification, I'm still not sure I like the rule, but I suppose it's tolerable. -- J. Giles