Talk:Name resolution (programming languages)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Split from the former all-in-one article

I've moved the content from a section in the 'Name resolution' page. Moving the comments too, but you might possibly want to see the old talk page. Aasasd (talk) 14:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

I made some changes:

object is not general enough. entity is better, especially since object has a specific meaning in programming languages (where things like type aliases are not objects, but do participate in name resolution).
Name resolution is also called name lookup.
The previous text was very vague about examples. It mentioned operating systems (?), network protocols, virtual memory, and various types of programming utilities. I introduced a clear separation between name resolution in computer languages (with a discussion of some of the relevant issues there (such as static vs dynamic lookup)), and name resolution in computer networks.
I changed the "See also" dynamic/static scoping links to just link to Scope (programming) (which will contain discussion of both)

-- Eelis 17:49, 2005 May 22 (UTC)

Use Context should be formally defined

I would like to see a section on 'use context' which is the semantic domain defined by the algorthyms mentioned in the text of the article.

For example, in the introduction the phrase 'used in a certain context' infers ANY context. It is thus inclusive of valid and invalid 'use'. The use context is the valid semantic domain of use.

For example C# interfaces ARE NOT THE SAME as C++ abstract methods because the 'use context' is different (see article on Virtual Inheritance).

Also the difference in inheritance scope (of the lines of inheritance) in C# (single implementation inheritance) and C++ (mulitple implementation inheritance) is another example of a 'scope level' that has major impact on the use context of classes.

A brief enumeration of the language independent 'scope levels' such as static/vs/dynamic, language binding, accessibility, visibility and MII/vs/SII would be most helpful to articulate what a 'use context' is. A taxononmy (as opposed to a parital and simple categorical list) would be cover a lot of ground.

In summary a 'use context' is the semantic domain defined in a language as specified by the language mechanisms that define the valid 'use context' of a code element.

Shawnk^talk—-Shawn wiki 17:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]