[Issue 3505] [module] static imports should be binded to the leaf module, not the fully qualified name
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3505 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|future |D2 --
[Issue 3505] [module] static imports should be binded to the leaf module, not the fully qualified name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3505 d...@dawgfoto.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||d...@dawgfoto.de Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from d...@dawgfoto.de 2012-02-13 10:44:03 PST --- It seems that renamed imports are sufficient for this given how much code it would break. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3505] [module] static imports should be binded to the leaf module, not the fully qualified name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3505 --- Comment #4 from Leandro Lucarella leandro.lucare...@sociomantic.com 2012-02-13 11:10:27 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) It seems that renamed imports are sufficient for this given how much code it would break. You might want to close bug 3503 and bug 3504 then too, because they were part of the same proposal to rethink the module system. This also was before D2 was considered frozen and there was some place to make breaking changes, now I don't think it will happen until a very major update, which doesn't seems to be very close either. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3505] [module] static imports should be binded to the leaf module, not the fully qualified name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3505 --- Comment #5 from d...@dawgfoto.de 2012-02-13 15:36:09 PST --- I have to say though that I fully agree with your proposals. Only it's a controversial thing and has way too much impact to be still considered. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3505] [module] static imports should be binded to the leaf module, not the fully qualified name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3505 Bill Baxter wbax...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wbax...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Bill Baxter wbax...@gmail.com 2009-11-14 08:37:38 PST --- Maybe something like this could be allowed to mean import renamed to the leaf: import (foo.bar.)MyModule; Sometimes I do want the actually fully qualified name, like for a module like std.string. Having string mucks with the type string. Or maybe parens around the part to keep: import foo.bar.(MyModule); -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3505] [module] static imports should be binded to the leaf module, not the fully qualified name
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3505 --- Comment #2 from Leandro Lucarella llu...@gmail.com 2009-11-14 09:20:25 PST --- (In reply to comment #1) Maybe something like this could be allowed to mean import renamed to the leaf: import (foo.bar.)MyModule; Sometimes I do want the actually fully qualified name, like for a module like std.string. Having string mucks with the type string. Or maybe parens around the part to keep: import foo.bar.(MyModule); I think it's very unfortunate to have a module with the same name of an almost built-in type. Maybe the module can be renamed to std.str; or we can live with: import str = std.string; Another possibility is, if bug 3503 gets implemented, is to leave static import untouched. I think that's even a good idea for backwards compatibility. static import std.string; import std.algorithm; std.string.foo(); algorithm.sort(); -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
