Hi, niedz., 28 lip 2019 o 05:17 Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> > Based on the received feedback, I plan to change this proposal from being > > "namespace-scoped" to being "directory-scoped" instead. This should both > > I don't think it improves much, in my opinion, and it also introduces > hard dependency in the language on specific placing of files and > directories - i.e. if you move file on the filesystem, it can actually > work differently, which was never the case before. Having concepts like > filenames change the core functionality of the language looks to me like > an example of leaky abstraction and a hack which may solve a particular > problem now but at the cost of making the whole design more messy and > introducing more problems in the future. > IMHO it would be impossible to find out what are the boundaries of namespace scope or package scope (whatever you call that) symbols without a root namespace file. I can imagine some can use explicit require to load library class to skip scoped declares, autoloads or whatever lands there. -- regards / pozdrawiam, -- Michał Brzuchalski about.me/brzuchal brzuchalski.com
