Mac OSX installer for dmd

Nick Sabalausky a at a.a
Mon Aug 2 19:52:08 PDT 2010

"Leandro Lucarella" <luca at> wrote in message 
news:20100803004718.GW3508 at
> Walter Bright, el  2 de agosto a las 16:12 me escribiste:
>> dsimcha wrote:
>> >It just seems like common sense to me that a module system (and a 
>> >language in
>> >general) should do what you mean as long as there's no ambiguity about 
>> >what you
>> >mean (without forcing you to specify things redundantly, such as by 
>> >using
>> >qualified names), but not guess what you mean when there is ambiguity. 
>> >Is there
>> >any other language that gets this right?
>> As far as I know, no other language does this right.
>> While it seems common sense in retrospect, coming up with it took a
>> while. D1 is close, but D2 shines.
>> Rob Pike (of Go fame) says Go doesn't allow function overloading
>> because of the confusion it causes. That's understandable given
>> C++'s uncontrollable overloading and open namespaces. D2 doesn't
>> have that problem.
> For me the problem with D is dependency control. You don't know what
> symbol come from which module. Yes, I know you can do explicit
> dependencies in D with static and selective imports, the same you can do
> the inverse in other languages with the import module.*-like syntax, but
> I think D got the default wrong, I prefer explicit by default.

Personally, I would find that to save a couple minutes once in a while, and 
be a PITA most of the time. I'd find that to be a poor tradeoff.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list