> Do you think using :* makes it explicit and consistent enough, or still not worth it in your opinion?
I think :all is even more explicit, and a little more consistent with the import only/except DSL: import Foo, only: [bar: :all, baz: 3] On Saturday, December 26, 2020 at 2:19:21 AM UTC-8 José Valim wrote: > Good points Devon. Do you think using :* makes it explicit and consistent > enough, or still not worth it in your opinion? > > On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 11:11 Wojtek Mach <woj...@wojtekmach.pl> wrote: > >> This addition would be nice for importing record macros, defrecord >> defines 3 different arities: 0, 1, and 2. >> >> On 26 Dec 2020, at 09:43, Devon Estes <devon....@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> This seems like a source of potentially confusing issues to me, as >> mentioned earlier. I do admit that this would be a very rare occurrence, >> but in general it seems to go against what I see as one of the common >> patterns in Elixir, which is that things are often explicit rather than >> implicit. This explicitness does come at the cost of more typing when >> writing the code, but it also comes with the benefit of stability and >> clarity when reading or changing code, which I (personally) see as an >> overall benefit. >> >> That said, if this does get implemented, using the :* atom for the arity >> would be explicit and would also keep the list passed to import/2 a keyword >> list. Bare atoms would be fine, too, but I see some value in the >> consistency of a keyword list for that argument as it removes the need for >> specific ordering. >> >> José Valim <jose....@dashbit.co> schrieb am Sa. 26. Dez. 2020 um 09:30: >> >>> I believe this was proposed a long time ago but I rejected it because of >>> name conflicts. For example, imagine you import all of "foo" and on v1 it >>> means adding both foo/2 and foo/3. However, on v2 the module also defines a >>> foo/1. There is a chance this new arity will conflict with a local foo/1. >>> >>> On the other hand, I would say having a function with the same name and >>> different arity as an import is something that should be avoided in general >>> (either by using a different name or not importing it), so I think it is >>> worth this addition. The only complexity I foresee in implementing this is >>> skipping the warning if one of the arities is invoked - but that's an >>> implementation detail. >>> >>> Therefore, I propose we do support this feature. My suggestion is to >>> represent said names with naked atoms, such as: >>> >>> import Enum, only: [:at, :map] >>> >>> Specific arities go at the end as any keyword list: >>> >>> import Enum, only: [:at, map: 2] >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 11:52 PM thojan...@gmail.com < >>> thojan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > e.g if you have a function with the same name but one less argument >>>> >>>> That can actually also be considered as a function with default values >>>> (and in the end, default values generate such functions with different >>>> arities). If not then I think it's a code smell and the function needs to >>>> be renamed. >>>> >>>> On Friday, December 25, 2020 at 11:43:03 PM UTC+1 zachary....@gmail.com >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Sorry, meant to say “in being able to say only import this >>>>> *function*”, not story :) >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 5:42 PM Zach Daniel <zachary....@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> There are theoretical name conflicts from not being able to say “only >>>>>> import this story” (e.g if you have a function with the same name but >>>>>> one >>>>>> less argument) what about import Mod, only: [func: 1..3]? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 5:36 PM thojan...@gmail.com < >>>>>> thojan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Say function `foo` has multiple default values (two required args, >>>>>>> two with defaults). When importing, we must specify each arity that is >>>>>>> used >>>>>>> in the calling code, e.g. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>> import Foo, only: [foo: 2, foo: 3, foo: 4] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> foo(1, 2) >>>>>>> foo(1, 2, 3) >>>>>>> foo(1, 2, 3, 4) >>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I expected that I could only import `foo/4`, and be able to call >>>>>>> `foo` with only two arguments and three arguments. Why? Because there >>>>>>> is no >>>>>>> use case to force an imported function to be used only with a specific >>>>>>> arity. That would even be a code smell. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Could we "generate" [foo: 2, foo: 3]` in addition to `[foo: 4]` to >>>>>>> support the call using its default values? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/28497895-3278-4de0-8423-99f9b9230597n%40googlegroups.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/28497895-3278-4de0-8423-99f9b9230597n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/38192124-1f41-407c-966e-82f223db3719n%40googlegroups.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/38192124-1f41-407c-966e-82f223db3719n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4JEwAOA2WYnbGAjgNtP3-d8kukc8_ieejX4mprAfBSHsg%40mail.gmail.com >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4JEwAOA2WYnbGAjgNtP3-d8kukc8_ieejX4mprAfBSHsg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- >> >> _________________ >> Devon Estes >> +49 176 2356 4717 >> www.devonestes.com >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "elixir-lang-core" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGowJciKZ25GejXy2gaZ8TipXaECJa8hW9JiZNgOOL1zX1e51w%40mail.gmail.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGowJciKZ25GejXy2gaZ8TipXaECJa8hW9JiZNgOOL1zX1e51w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "elixir-lang-core" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/F12F687F-F146-4F1B-BA78-6594C6107BEF%40wojtekmach.pl >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/F12F687F-F146-4F1B-BA78-6594C6107BEF%40wojtekmach.pl?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/7a768587-5d1c-4773-9c50-7d4cf47ca3d2n%40googlegroups.com.
