Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[SR-5110] Name collision not solved with namespacing #47686

Closed
swift-ci opened this issue Jun 6, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

[SR-5110] Name collision not solved with namespacing #47686

swift-ci opened this issue Jun 6, 2017 · 1 comment

Comments

@swift-ci
Copy link
Collaborator

@swift-ci swift-ci commented Jun 6, 2017

Previous ID SR-5110
Radar https://bugreport.apple.com/web/?problemID=32590357
Original Reporter Quintana (JIRA User)
Type Bug
Status Resolved
Resolution Duplicate
Environment

Xcode 9 beta 1

Additional Detail from JIRA
Votes 1
Component/s Compiler
Labels Bug
Assignee None
Priority Medium

md5: 18451fab6884f0b95388b0d7b3e5d5d0

duplicates:

  • SR-898 Unresolvable "ambiguous for type lookup" error when using multiple modules

Issue Description:

Having a name collision in Xcode 9/Swift 3.2 is not solved by prefixing the module name in some cases.

I have a iOS project that has a dependency named `Decodable` which has a protocol you could adopt named the same way. Since Swift 3.2 also added a protocol name `Decodable`, there's a name collision.

I instantly thought of namespacing the protocol conformace to remove the error. But it did not work.

```
class MyClass: Decodable -> class MyClass: Decodable.Decodable
```

However, namespacing with `Swift`, does work, but does not solve the issue

```
class MyClass: Decodable -> class MyClass: Swift.Decodable
```

@belkadan
Copy link
Contributor

@belkadan belkadan commented Apr 11, 2019

Consolidating.

@swift-ci swift-ci transferred this issue from apple/swift-issues Apr 25, 2022
This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants