How about Go's... error on unused imports?

[Don]

Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> Walter Bright, el 14 de noviembre a las 14:59 me escribiste:
>> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>>> Walter Bright, el 14 de noviembre a las 10:36 me escribiste:
>>>> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>>>>> Does this makes more sense?
>>>> Yes.
>>> It would be pushing to much to ask if you're willing to give it a serious
>>> thought then? =)
>> I understand it (I think), but I'm not as keen on it as you are <g>.
>>
>> Consider that D has function hijacking protection (I think this is
>> unique to D) so that inadvertent overloading by the same names in
>> different imports is virtually eliminated. So I think the marginal
>> benefit of the proposed changes is small.
> 
> I can see that it would be too much trouble for too little gain (from you
> POV, I still think that readability is key for code-review, which
> I consider key for high-quality code).

It seems to me that it is a code beautifier proposal. When your code is 
completely working, you many run some kind of 'beautify' step. There are 
many other beautifier processes that could be run. They improve the 
productivity of the maintenance guys but I think it would be a severe 
nuisance to be required to use them continuously during development.