On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 10:23 AM, bearophile <bearophileh...@lycos.com> wrote:
> Bill Baxter:
>
>>I think this problem you refer to only applies to modules without package
>>names. I.e. "module Foo" containing "class Foo". Things seem to work ok if
>>you have "module x.Foo" with "class Foo" inside.<
>
> Right. But why settle with a half-backed module system when there are more
> logic ways to design it? :-)
>
>
>> So you are saying you want this to be an error?
>>
>> import std.string;
>> void foo() {
>> std.string.format("hi"); // error no such symbol "std.string"
>> format("hi"); // ok
>> }
>
>
> The following examples show what I mean:
>
> import std.string;
> void foo() {
> std.string.format("hi"); // OK, "std.string" name exists in the current
> scope.
> format("hi"); // Error, "format" name is absent.
> }
Ok. You mean like Python. I guess people here have bullied you into
stop using that phrase. :-)
That would be fine by me. I'm also a big supporter of static import by default.
But I think it still doesn't solve the Stdout.Stdout annoyance does it?
>>auto x = new Foo; // Foo.Foo should not be needed if class Foo is the only
>>thing inside Foo.<
>
> That's a special casing, it may look handy, but it may also lead to troubles
> later. So I think it's better to keep things tidy, and avoid that. D allows
> enough things (renamed imports, alias, and selective imports) to solve such
> problems already.
If you think so, then you should argue for removal of the special case
stuff for templates too. On the other hand, if it worked for modules
templates and classes, then would it be all that much of a special
case?
>> template AReallyLongTemplateNameIDontWannaTypeTwice(T) {
>> void this(T x) { }
>> }
>
> You can write that in D1 as:
>
> void aReallyLongTemplateNameIDontWannaTypeTwice(T)(T x) {
> }
Ok, bad example. Try that for a template that defines a constant or an alias.
template AReallyLongTemplateNameIDontWannaTypeTwice(T) {
alias T[] ReallyLongTemplateNameIDontWannaTypeTwice;
}
--bb
