A little contradiction with Declare Sub Constructor in a udt

[Tourist Trap]

Hello,

I noticed that declaring a Sub named Constructor fires an error message as follows

error 4
duplicated definition, found 'constructor' ...

But, if you did actually no't declare the constructor, you will be told that:

error 18
element not defined

(if you call the routine member named constructor that you are told is defined)

If we extends from OBJECT all turns correct however.

Code to play with to understand fully this (small) issue:

Code: Select all

type T  ' extends OBJECT
  declare sub constructor()
  as integer ii
end type

dim tt as T
tt.constructor()

So even for the non extended from OBJECT stuff, a constructor (empty) should apparently exist. Or the messages are contradictory.

Thanks!

[fxm]

Since fbc 0.18.3, this is that same error message which is reported when attempting to use a reserved name forbidden in a specific context:

Code: Select all

Type UDT1
  Dim As Integer Constructor  '' OK
  Dim As Integer Implements   '' OK
  Dim As Integer Class        '' OK
End Type

Type UDT2
  Declare Sub Constructor ()  ''error 4: Duplicated definition
  Declare Sub Implements ()   ''error 4: Duplicated definition
  Declare Sub Class ()        ''error 4: Duplicated definition
  Dim As Integer I
End Type

There is no error message of the type "reserved keyword".

[Tourist Trap]

There is no error message of the type "reserved keyword".

Ah that's the explanation. Thanks fxm!