Hello colleague, merci, that was the discussion i was looking for (#14472 from Tim is in a similar area). I do not have a clear need, otherwise i would have a full example. However this providing optional functions in modules - which is the only 'real' encapsulation mechanism in Julia shows up in some places and is/might be a 0.6 issue. Because knowing in advance what type of system should be supported by a package is tricky...
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 11:24:36 AM UTC+1, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote: > > Le lundi 21 mars 2016 à 03:19 -0700, Andreas Lobinger a écrit : > > Hello colleague, > > > > sorry i wasn't clear enough. I'm aware of the MoO for packages and > > extensions and i'm a great fan of modularisation. However the topic > > of optional include/import or something like "require" (deprecated) > > is still around. Not everything can be formulated into a tree of > > dependencies that exist on all systems. I'm experimenting with libxcb > > (so close to X11) and i assume this will not be available for MS- > > Windows based systems. > It's still not clear to me why you'd need to add functions to an > existing module... > > > But i'm still trying to find this in the issues. > Maybe you're looking for this? > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/6884 > > > Regards > > > > If you want to add functions to the Cairo module, open pull > > > requests or use your fork for the time being. eval'ing into modules > > > that aren't yours is not a good practice. You can create a > > > CairoExtensions.jl package that depends on Cairo and uses its copy > > > of libcairo. >
