On Monday, 14 July 2014 at 15:34:12 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Monday, 14 July 2014 at 14:24:39 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 14/07/14 11:35, Dicebot wrote:
Yes, something like separate "partially static" import type.
I doesn't need language support. Just have a single function,
"log", which returns a struct. The struct have all the
"error", "warning" and so on, functions.
It is exactly what I don't want to see, it is an aberration.
Never ever.
D unit of encapsulation is module. Any other "namespace"
solutions must die after proper torture. However we do miss
sane built-in compromise between overly verbose static imports
and overly clashing normal imports - this need to be solved via
language feature in the long term because it is fundamental
module system use case.
One option could be to relax `static import` to allow
module-qualified usage too. Until then `import mod = pkg.mod;` is
a good simple idiom that fits existing module system.
