Re: DIP10005: Dependency-Carrying Declarations is now available for community feedback

[Yuxuan Shui via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 14 December 2016 at 00:21:23 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:

On 14.12.2016 01:14, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

On 12/13/16 6:03 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:

[...]

That is a problem. I switched to the most attractive alternate syntax.

https://github.com/andralex/DIPs/blob/2e5859c0f64ac4949123fe8de39ccf2ccf72d859/DIPs/DIP1005.md



Andrei

I'd still advise to match the syntax of other import declarations. What justifies the difference? (Note that import(foo.bar.baz) is a string import.)

Maybe it's a good idea to make it a property?

e.g.:

@import("std.stdio") void process(File f);