weird behavior of catch scoping rules

[jonathandavid]

Consider the current behavior of Cobra in three similar programs.

class Program1

    def main is shared
        
        try
            pass
        catch ex as Exception
            pass
        
        try
            pass
        catch ex as FormatException            # Compiler error: redeclaration of ex from Exception to FormatException
            pass

class Program2

    def main is shared
        
        try
            pass
        catch ex as Exception
            pass
        
        try
            pass
        catch ex as Exception         # Works, since type of ex is preserved
            pass

class Program3

    def main is shared
        
        try
            pass
        catch ex as Exception
            pass
        
        try
            pass
        catch ex          # Compiler error: cannot find type of ex
            pass

I can understand the error in Program1, taking into account that Cobra's loose block scoping rules are based on Python.

With that in mind, I can understand Program 2 as well, although I would expect it to issue a warning that said something like "you can remove as Exception, since ex is already of that type".

But what I don't understand is Program3. From programs 1 and 2 it is clear that ex is still on scope, so then why is it that the compiler chokes when it finds "ex" without a type?

[Charles]

It's because Cobra is "seeing" it as the form:

catch <Type>

Which is a supported form of catching: You can catch the type without putting a reference into a variable.

I guess I'm okay with "catch <var>" so if you want to ticket that, please do so.

I'm doubtful about adding the warning for case 2 as the redundancy isn't really for the benefit of the variable, but for the benefit or reading that particular try...catch which may have multiple catches and may be far removed from the first try.