Issue 9987 - Declaring struct ModuleInfo should be allowed

[9rnsr]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9987

[MartinNowak]

Thanks for fixing this. Why did you make it dmd2 only?

[MartinNowak]

It seems to me that we could drop other reserved classnames too if we ensure, that the compiler always uses fully qualified names to access them. The candidates are Throwable, TypeInfo_*, Object etc., not subject to this pull of course.

[9rnsr]

Why did you make it dmd2 only?

The macro constant MODULEINFO_IS_STRUCT relies on DMDV2. So the code enclosed with it is shared between D1 and D2. I'd like to keep D1 code behavior.

[9rnsr]

It seems to me that we could drop other reserved classnames too if we ensure, that the compiler always uses fully qualified names to access them. The candidates are Throwable, TypeInfo_*, Object etc., not subject to this pull of course.

I'm not sure this should be done. Yes, we would be able to remove the limitation, but redefining the names in user code might introduce some confusion. (If redefine Exception, the code try { .. } catch (Exception) {} would be changed not working.)

[ghost]

Yes and currently some things are allowed, like overriding the definition of string. Even though it is just an alias in object.d, it's a bad idea to overwrite the meaning of this alias.

[MartinNowak]

I mostly agree with both of you, what we're seeing is an artifact of modelling builtin reserved types with an import of object. Ideally some of these would live in a namespace above the normal one.

[dnadlinger]

See #2175.