"Martin Nowak" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:57:06 +0200, Jacob Carlborg <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 2011-10-18 23:49, Jonathan M Davis wrote: >>> On Tuesday, October 18, 2011 00:38 Martin Nowak wrote: >>>> http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP14 >>> >>> I really think that you lose something when you add file paths to >>> imports >>> rather than letting the module system deal with it as it does now. The >>> result >>> is messier, and I really don't think that it adds anything for the >>> normal >>> case. I don't think that anything should be added to the language to >>> support a >>> package manager without a _really_ good reason. It should be perfectly >>> possible to do package management without changing the language. >>> >>> - Jonathan M Davis >> >> One thing that would be nice is to be able, in the source code, somehow >> add additional imports paths. >> >> But on the other hand, if this would be possible you would need to add >> this to every source file that uses modules from those imports paths. Or >> you would need a source file that basically just list new imports paths >> which will be globally available. > Which is what I finally did. > https://github.com/dawgfoto/graphics/blob/master/src/graphics/_.d > > Where the importpath pragma is simply appending to the -I list, thus had > global scope. > The good thing about this is that it is decentral and recursive w.r.t. the > imported sources. >
I'm convinced that absolute import paths/URLs should *never* be specified in the code. It's the single most inflexible way to handle package management. It would just be enabling and encouraging very bad practice.
