DIP10005: Dependency-Carrying Declarations is now available for community feedback

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 12/15/2016 11:11 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/15/2016 6:53 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> The document does specify the advantages and disadvantages of lazy
>> imports, as follows:
>>
>> ===
>> * Full lazy `import`s. Assume all `import`s are lazy without any
>> change in the
>> language. That would allow an idiom by which libraries use fully
>> qualified names
>> everywhere, and the `import`s would be effected only when names are
>> looked up.
>> This would allow scalability but not the dependency-carrying aspect.
>> ===
>
> That would be a massive breaking change.

This may be a misunderstanding. The idiom would be opt-in so existing 
behavior will be preserved (albeit it won't benefit of the improvements).

Andrei