On Friday, 23 February 2018 at 16:03:56 UTC, Aurélien Plazzotta wrote:

Perhaps, we could use Backus-Naur notation, as it is already widely known into formal documents all over the globe, like the following:

import std.stdio, std.whatever{this, that}, std.somethingelse, std.grr{wtf};

That is with curly brackets instead of square brackets like you suggest :)

Yeah...again.. I'd prefer to not to have to think differently about syntax, just for writing imports. That's why I'd prefer to just think of them as arrays using D's array like syntax.

import std.stdio [writeln, write = cwrite, writefln], std.whatever;

I'm not sufficiently motivated to do anything here anyway, as I don't believe a case for change can really be justified - cause how many imports can you realistically include on a single line anyway?

The current way is just fine, and provides really good clarity for what's going on.

But I would (and am) very, very motivated to oppose introduction of an obscure, confusing, or foreign syntax.

The real motivator for the change, as i see it, seemed to be related to thinking that the imports section was not really for human consumption - which it not true at all. The second motivate seemed to be related to saving a few keystrokes or line space. Again, human consumption should take priority here in my view.

Anyway, the point is moot at this point - since the change is being reversed and nobody seems motivated to push it again. Which is just fine with me ;-)

Reply via email to