Import status

[Rioshin an'Harthen]

"Lucas Goss" <lgoss007 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Question about prefix-importing...
>
> Is this suggested as importing the fully qualified name as well? If so 
> then I'd change the solution to too wordy, as the current alias already 
> does this, just on a separate line correct? Which is it:
>
> 1 -prefix-importing (with fully qualified name)
>     -tries to solve problem of being too wordy (a one line alias import)
>
> 2 -prefix-importing (replacing fully qualified name)
>     -tries to solve problem of name collisions

My opinion is: never ever forbid the use of FQN's to use a symbol.

I tend to (in longer functions), if I've imported according to as follows

import module.with.a.long.name;
alias module.with.a.long.name mwln;

to write something akin to

module.with.a.long.name.foo();
// a few lines later
mwln.bar();

which helps readability - first time a symbol is used from a module, write 
the FQN of the module name, and after that, use the short alias.

In Java, I tend to do something like this. I import the symbols I require, 
and the first time in a longish method, I write the fully qualified name of 
the symbol, and only then the short form - this lets me, or anyone else 
reading the code, quickly in the same function/method see from where the 
symbol comes from, and isn't too much of a trouble when it comes to 
wordiness.