>>>>I said "a prg with twice the same procedure/method/function" - and "a" means "one". When more than one, then it's as you say - and if in the one prg which catches there's the same name twice, I guess it would still forget the first one and have only the last one in names lookup.
>>>
>>>This is a design flaw. Should raise an error both does not. I think one should avoid this situation anyway?
>>
>>Avoid, for sure. But I don't think there should be anything more than document view sorted by name, which should make it visible, or a project scanning tool which may catch that.
>>
>>This happens to me perhaps once a year - when creating a long prg-based class by copying and then changing methods from a similar class used on another project. Sometimes I do that with one method, then the next day I forget that I did that and do it again, so I have the same method twice. The crazier scenario is when I add a method to a class written by someone else, and give it a very logical and obvious name - well, being on the same team, we think alike and this other guy came up with the same name years ago :).
>
>The use of prg classes is very limited - to the non visual classes like Header or Column - with me. If the prg grows to large - pain. Multiple methods visible - pain.

We have very different syndromes, aka styles. Having to jump through several windows to find the method I want to look at, not being able to do a search between a known start and end (literally bof() and eof()), not being able to use a simple diff (from TotalCommander, of course :)) between two versions... But then what I mostly do has very little in visual classes, it's mostly bizobjects which are flat .prg things.

An old UTer, Peter Robinson, once did convert all of his forms into .prg based classes. The end result: the app was half the old size, and the instantiation of forms was about twice as fast. Of course, he had to have some discipline about it - some kind of semiautomatic layout based on a 12px grid, and he used Courier everywhere - unnecessarily IMO but he did that even in vcx/scx based times - but it worked damn well and he said that it was worth the effort.