[Grace-core] [Minigrace] minor nits - should imports be inherited

[Andrew P Black]

On 28 Nov 2013, at 14:23 , Michael Homer <mwh at ecs.vuw.ac.nz> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Andrew P Black <black at cs.pdx.edu> wrote:
>> Michael,
>> Are you saying that the "is local" annotation that you previously proposed is not a good idea?  I don't see why having a name in an outer scope, that is explicitly declared to be local,  would stop me from re-using that name in an inner scope.
>> Yes, we have a no shadowing rule,  but if the name is not accessible, then it's not being shadowed, right?
> The dialect doesn't change the semantics of the language. All it can
> do is raise errors. It can't get you out of the shadowing rule. All it
> can do is not raise one itself, which means the shadowing check will
> instead.

Yes, I'm afraid that you are right.  This is an interesting shortcoming of our dialect mechanism that ought to be mentioned in the paper.  

Is it enough to make us drop the no shadowing rule?