2009/3/5 Jonathan Tran <jonnyt...@gmail.com> > > On Mar 5, 9:24 am, Chouser <chou...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > So the least-breaking change proposed here would be simply that if > > :use is given an :as parameter, that it no longer also refer all the > > other symbols directly. > > > > Rich seemed to want to reduce the breakage here as much as possible, > > and IMHO this is pretty minimal. > > > > If it's still too much potential breakage this behavior could be > > attached to a new top-level name such as :uses or :demand, to be a new > > sibling of :use and :require. > > No!!! Please, not _another_ namespace function.
+1 > I find all the > namespace stuff in Clojure to be overly complicated already. To > newcomers, it must be utterly confusing... with ns, use, import, > require, refer, and then all the ns-* and *-ns stuff. > > I think collapsing :use and :require into :use is a great idea. +1 > > Before I completely understood it, the proposed idea is how I > expected :use to work in the first place -- not dumping everything in > your namespace when you say :as. > > As for not wanting to make breaking changes... I'm a little baffled by > this considering the whole laziness changes broke my code in _much_ > more subtle ways. My two cents is that if we're going to make > breaking changes at all, let's do them right, and not introduce yet > more cruft with another function. Agreed. > > > Jonathan > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
