1) They have everything to do with it. But as I said, you misunderstand what "resolve" and "bind" means. The compiler doesn't need to know the exact type in order to bind names.
2) They can be. I have said so many times.
Printable View
1) They have everything to do with it. But as I said, you misunderstand what "resolve" and "bind" means. The compiler doesn't need to know the exact type in order to bind names.
2) They can be. I have said so many times.
Thanks CornedBee,
From your help on this thread, I understand some of my points is wrong -- in the past.
Just curious to ask you, why the Spec involves the concept of dependent name and non-dependent name?
1. from bound point of view
From our discussion, dependent names should all be bound during instantiation time, but not all non-dependent names (like v and tmp in my sample) are bound during definition time.
So, from bound point of view, dependent name and non-dependent name do not distinguish anything?
2. from resolve point of view
dependent name and non-dependent name could distinguish names resolved at definition/instantiation time? I am not 100% sure about this.
It is appreciated if you could comment and give your definition about what is the differences between bound and resolved.
have a good weekend,
George
I have no longer the faintest idea what concepts you associate with the words "bind" and "resolve".