Hi Martin, > Date: 2026-09-15 12:28:31+0200 > From: Martin Uecker > [...] > > > But then again, it seems very unlikely that writes > > > > > > enum { MAX_DIMS = 100 }; > > > > > > void i(int a[MAX_DIMS], int MAX_DIMS); > > > > > > with the intention that the first MAX_DIMS actually > > > refers to the global variable and not to the parameter. > > > If such code exits, it is  almost certainly already an > > > unintentional error. > > > > And you would not diagnose such an unintentional error? > > This would not be a new error, but an old one. > Nobody felt the need to diagnose this in the last four decades. > And after the change, it would not be an error, so there seems > even less reason to diagnose it. If retroactive scoping is added but optional (to allow small compilers to live without it), then it might become a problem. Porting code using it to compilers not supporting it might successfully compile, but have different semantics. [...] > > QoI might result in diagnostic if it turns out to be a problem. But I would be okay, since indeed QoI would come to save us. > But if it were a real issue, we would have the diagnostic already. Cheers, Alex > > Martin --