"deadalnix" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > On Monday, 6 May 2013 at 03:16:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: >> This DIP (which is similar to DIP 15) was discussed with Walter and >> Andrei at >> dconf 2013: >> >> http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP37 >> >> They verbally approved it in that discussion and it has already been >> implemented by Daniel Murpy (though it hasn't been merged in yet): >> >> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1961 >> >> There is also an enhancement request for it: >> >> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10022 >> >> The idea is very simple and does not require large changes to the >> compiler to >> work as it mostly takes advantage of what the module system and imports >> already do. However, it probably does merit having an actual DIP for it >> as >> well as a public discussion, so I've created a DIP for it and am opening >> this >> thread so that we can discuss it. >> > > I would prefer to find the package file in std/datetime.d so no change is > required in lookup rules. Whatever the naming convention is, I'm all for > it.
Using 'package' means you can't actually explicitly name the module. Not sure why you'd want/need to... With the lookup rules this shouldn't actually be a problem. The of your suggestion downside is that you then don't have the entire package contents inside the package directory. I think that would be a pain.
