[omniORB] IDL : parameter clashes with identifier

[Nicolas Olivier]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Duncan Grisby <duncan at grisby.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-10-20 at 11:47 +0200, Nicolas Olivier wrote:
>
>> I encounter an error parsing an idl on the following declaration :
>>
>> void getMLSNPP(
>>   in globaldefs::NamingAttributes_T mLSNPPName,
>>   out mLSNPP::MultiLayerSNPP_T mLSNPP)
>>  raises(globaldefs::ProcessingFailureException);
>>
>> The error is :
>> Declaration of parameter 'mLSNPP' clashes with use of identifier 'mLSNPP'
>>
>> I've read in the FAQ that two identifiers must differ in case, but in
>> this declaration, mLSNPP is a scope, and MultiLayerSNPP_T is, from my
>> point of view, the identifier.
>>
>> Is it really the behaviour expected, in case I fix the idl ?
>
> Yes, it's expected, and omniidl is correct in saying your IDL is
> invalid. Section 3.15.2 of the CORBA 2.6 spec says:
>
> -----
> An identifier from a surrounding scope is introduced into a scope if it
> is used in that scope. An identifier is not introduced into a scope by
> merely being visible in that scope. The use of a scoped name introduces
> the identifier of the outermost scope of the scoped name. For example
> in:
>
> module M {
>      module Inner1 {
>          typedef string S1;
>      };
>      module Inner2 {
>          typedef string inner1;            // OK
>      };
> }
>
> The declaration of Inner2::inner1 is OK because the identifier Inner1,
> while visible in module Inner2, has not been introduced into module
> Inner2 by actual use of it. On the other hand, if module Inner2 were:
>
> module Inner2{
>      typedef Inner1::S1 S2;           // Inner1 introduced
>      typedef string inner1;           // Error
>      typedef string S1;               // OK
> };
>
> The definition of inner1 is now an error because the identifier Inner1
> referring to the module Inner1 has been introduced in the scope of
> module Inner2 in the first line of the module declaration. Also, the
> declaration of S1 in the last line is OK since the identifier S1 was not
> introduced into the scope by the use of Inner1::S1 in the first line.
>
> Only the first identifier in a qualified name is introduced into the
> current scope. This is illustrated by Inner1::S1 in the example above,
> which introduces "Inner1" into the scope of "Inner2" but does not
> introduce "S1." A qualified name of the form "::X::Y::Z" does not cause
> "X" to be introduced, but a qualified name of the form "X::Y::Z" does.
> -----
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Duncan.
>
> --
>  -- Duncan Grisby         --
>  -- duncan at grisby.org     --
>   -- http://www.grisby.org --
>
>
>

Ok, thanks for the quick answer.

Regards,
Nikolas