version and extern problems

[0ffh]

nonnymouse wrote:
> 0ffh Wrote:
> 
>> Nope. This, for example, is a perfectly valid D program:
> [snip] Then it must be "foo is not defined on line 1". ;-)
> 
> I think maybe you thought I said line 1 last time. I said line 2. I was assuming that the compiler had 
> looked ahead and come to a dead-end (or more expressively: a cul-de-sac). (We are assuming that is either 
> the whole program or the only lines that matter here are we?)

Oops, now I get your drift. I was indeed misunderstanding you!
I think one might rather choose to call it a circular or recursive problem...

> At some point, even if it is just before code generation all these symbols need to be defined.
> [...] "Symbol x cannot de defined as definition of x is based on definition of x" might make a bit more sense.
> Please, if possible, read this as a question rather than an answer. i.e I would genuinely like to be 
> corrected where I have misunderstood (or missed out) some of the complexities of these issues.

Well, I think the gist of your explanation is right, even if we cannot know
about the actual implementation details.

Regards, frank

p.s.
Funny thing, I don't get you; and in turn Bill doesn't get me! That's Karma, if not coincidence! ;-)