envy for "Writing Go Packages"

[Walter Bright]

Michel Fortin wrote:
> On 2010-05-07 13:55:34 -0400, Walter Bright <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> 
> said:
> 
>> Source code could look something like:
>>
>>      import http.d_repository.foo.version1_23;
>>
>> and the compiler could interpret "http" as meaning the rest is an 
>> internet url, foo is the package name, and version1_23 is the 
>> particular version of it.
> 
> So now, each time a new version of a library pops up you need to 
> search-replace the version number for all your source code, and source 
> code of other library you depend on? This is insane.
> 
> The version number shouldn't be there, except perhaps if it's a 'major' 
> version number full of breaking changes.

If you leave the version number off, it gets the latest version. If you put it 
on, it reliably stays the same. I don't see an issue.


> Also, putting in the source code the location or protocol to fetch the 
> repository isn't much better. There's a reason we have a module import 
> path: so that finding external code depends on compile-time 
> configuration, not on the actual code you build.

It's a good point, but I think it's a detail.

> Allowing URLs in the import path might be an interesting idea though.