Warn on unused imports?

[Laurent Tréguier]

On Wednesday, 26 September 2018 at 01:13:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> The way that C++ handles warnings is how I've seen most 
> languages handle warnings. IMHO, the only time that anything 
> along the lines of a warning makes sense is when the programmer 
> is proactively running a tool to specifically ask to be 
> informed of a potential type of problem where they will then go 
> look at each of them individually and decide whether what the 
> tool is telling them is valid or not - at which point, some of 
> what the tool says will be followed, and some if it will be 
> ignored. It's not something that should be run as part of a 
> normal build process. If it is, then inevitably what happens is 
> that either all of the warnings get "fixed" (at which point, 
> they might as well have all been errors), or they all get 
> ignored, meaning that you get a huge wall of them, and they're 
> completely useless. As such, I really have nothing good to say 
> about having any kind of warnings being built into the 
> compiler. As I understand it, on the whole, Walter agrees with 
> me and that he only added them in to dmd, because he was 
> essentially bullied into it, and I wish that he'd never given 
> in. And when you consider features like is(typeof(...)), the 
> side effects of having -w are particularly bad.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

I would say that at least deprecations make sense as warnings 
from the compiler. Deprecated stuff is something the user has to 
be warned about, even if they're not using a linter, since it's 
going to break at some point but should be supported for a 
minimum amount of time to ensure a smooth transition.