the point of selective importing

[Jari-Matti Mäkelä]

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> I believe I might have been a bit rash here, but I got somewhat pissed
> pouring over all the posts for the last few days. I will therefore restate
> some of my thoughts in a calmer manner:
> 
> If we for a second ignore the language issues chatted about recently, most
> people agree that D is missing libraries to be able to really compete with
> other languages. It is therefore unfathomable to me why you Walter don't
> actively try to make it easy to create good libraries in D. Libraries that
> can be made stable, failsafe and predictable. You have said many enough
> times that D is different enough to need different solutions to problems
> already solved in other languages. Why is it then that you seemingly refuse
> to listen to those that have tried to solve these problems in D over the
> years? Those that have found that the language features in D probably need
> to be refined to not only make libraries in D possible, but fun to write,
> fun to use, safe to use and with a predictable usage pattern.

I think you're a bit too harsh on Walter now. In the recent two week or
so Walter has fixed many important things like most of the import bugs.
The only thing left are:

 * some people thing that imports should be private by default
   - changing this would break some old code, but does it matter?
    (statistically private imports are much more common)

 * most of the people want an additional safe import syntax that allows
importing to a custom namespace.

 * some general show-stopper bugs

The first two of these are luckily easy to fix. We're not far from 1.0.
If were not in a hurry, I would like the interface things to be fixed
(that double lookup implementation) too before reaching stable. Then D
will be perfect for real production level use.

-- 
Jari-Matti