Ignore the previous mail. I must have brain freeze this morning.
-John K
On 5 Mar 2004, at 09:30, John Keyes wrote:
> The unusual thing about the paragraph is that it states:
>
> If a local variable has the same name and same
> messageType/type/element as a variable defined
> in an enclosing scope, the local variable will
> be used in local assignments and/or
> getVariableProperty functions
>
> This means the variable defined in the enclosing scope is ignored.
> Reading on:
>
> It is not permitted to have variables with same
> name but different messageType/type/element within
> an enclosing scope hierarchy. The behavior of such
> variables is not defined.
>
> As mentioned in some of the other responses this is an unnecessary
> restriction. The thing I find unusual is that it would have
> been more concise to say:
>
> The behavior of variables with the same name within
> an enclosing scope hierarchy is not defined.
>
> +1 on removing the restriction.
>
> -John K
>
> On 3 Mar 2004, at 23:31, Danny van der Rijn wrote:
>
>> in 9.2, it says: "It is not permitted to have variables with same
>> name but
>> different messageType/type/element within an enclosing scope
>> hierarchy."
>>
>> can someone explain to me why it is necessary to have this
>> restriction?
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster
>> of the OASIS TC), go to
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/
>> leave_workgroup.php.
>>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster
> of the OASIS TC), go to
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/
> leave_workgroup.php.
>
