what's the difference between 'static import =' and 'import ='?

[Don Clugston]

Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> Boris Wang wrote:
>> "John Reimer" <John_member at pathlink.com> 
>> дÈëÏûÏ¢ÐÂÎÅ:e9knp5$fk1$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
>>> In article <9vh8joe3sla0.1se36qil8397i$.dlg at 40tude.net>, Derek 
>>> Parnell says...
>>>> On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 06:14:11 +0000 (UTC), John Reimer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <e9k8bv$2usv$1 at digitaldaemon.com>, Boris Wang says...
>>>>>> For example:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    * static import io = std.stdio;
>>>>>>    * import io = std.stdio;
>>>>>>
>>>>> Good question.  Have you tested these first to see what happens or 
>>>>> if the first
>>>>> even works?  I think that might answer your question.  Then you can 
>>>>> tell those
>>>>> of us who haven't had a chance to try yet. :)
>>>>>
>>>> There is no difference. They function in an identical manner.
>>>>
>>>>  static import XXX;
>>>>  import XXX = whatever;
>>>>  static import XXX = whatever;
>>>>
>>>> all require that 'XXX' be used to reference members in the code.
>>>>
>>>> However, if you decide to allow non-FQN all you have to do is *add* the
>>>> line 'import XXX;' somewhere in your module and all the FQN 
>>>> requirements
>>>> disappear.
>>>>
>>> Ah... ok. Good to know. I guess we have a very flexible system in 
>>> place, capable
>>> of accomodating several styles.  And Walter gets to have his "static 
>>> import" as
>>> well. :)
>>>
>>> -JJR
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No, I don't think so.
>>
>> Something need refining.
>>
>> Why not discard the sentence 'static import' ? When you need FQN to 
>> access a package, just do it.
>>
>> For example
>>
>> int main(void)
>> {
>>     std.stdio.writefln("Just do it"); // not need any importing
>>     ...
>> }
>>
>>
> 
> I like the idea of FQN access automatically available for all modules, 
> but the way I'd like that to be done is not for the compiler to try to 
> implicitly search and import modules when encountering unknown names 
> (like the 'std.stdio.writefln' in the example above).
> Rather, the whole set of modules that a program uses could be set at the 
> start, by compiler options (or the fqnall trick). This would avoid the 
> name issues mentioned by pragma and Don (the "class std {...}") as well 
> as allow an IDE to show completion for the available modules&packages.

Well, you can do this already with a
----
module usingphobos;
public import stdio = std.stdio;
public import string = std.string;
(etc)


----
import usingphobos;

void main()
{
     stdio.writefln("Yes it works!");
}
----
All it takes is a single import at the top of each file.