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

[pineapple via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 02:40:59 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
> D doesn't have either of those pitfalls, so I haven't seen it 
> cause problems. I'm also a bit skeptical that this will see 
> much use outside phobos.
>
> This isn't really an argument against it. I just don't see any 
> argument for it, not that's supported by my own experience.

I would like to echo this sentiment.

I am developing a general-use library for D that is currently 
resting at around 50,000 lines. I have never felt a need for a 
feature like this, and I can't imagine a reason to begin using 
it. Dependency management has just never presented an issue. Very 
nearly all modules in the library are fewer than 1,000 lines long 
and very nearly all symbols are selectively imported, and the 
approach has proven to be completely manageable.

If it can be added without interfering with the existing 
patterns, I don't really have an argument against this feature. 
But I do think that what this DIP is meant to address is not 
really a problem experienced by all or even most who are working 
with D. It's a problem being experienced with Phobos, but there 
are very valid solutions to that problem that don't involve an 
addition to the language - only some refactoring. I think that 
makes the argument in favor somewhat weak.