Compiler doesn't complain with multiple definitions

[ric maicle via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Thursday, 12 November, 2015 07:50 PM, anonymous wrote:
> __traits has special syntax. The first "argument" must be from a list of
> special keywords that only have special meaning in that place. You can't
> put the name of a struct there, and you can't put the special keyword
> anywhere else. So there's no ambiguity, and you're not redefining
> anything. Everything's fine.

Thanks for clarifying __traits.

On another thing. I'm wondering why the compiler didn't issue a warning
on struct isPOD and byte isPOD? Isn't this called 'shadowing' or have I
misunderstood the term?