import concerns (was Re: Historical language survey)

[Dave]

Derek Parnell wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 13:36:49 +1000, Walter Bright 
> <newshound at digitalmars.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> But the suggestions involve changing the importer code, too. I'm not 
>> seeing the advantage of that over fully qualifying the references or 
>> using an alias, both of which will ensure that no future imports will 
>> cause name collisions.
> 
> I tend to agree with Walter on this one. The only thing that might be 
> needed in a post 1.0 edition of D is some syntax help to make the job of 
> tedious alias coding a lot easier.
> 
>> What can be done is something like add a warning whenever a name is 
>> found using the second-class import lookup, rather than using an alias 
>> or a fully qualified lookup. Then, you'll be able to easily purge your 
>> code of any such, and be confident that adding other modules will not 
>> break your existing code.
> 
> Not a bad idea at all.
> 
>> What can also be done is extend the import declaration to allow the 
>> .'s to continue so that specific symbols can be imported.
> 
> An excellent idea because it does the job and follows the consistent 
> look of D. Makes my job in Build a bit harder though ;-)
> 

Completely agree.

> --Derek Parnell
> Melbourne, Australia