On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 20:27:58 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
- We'd like to be able to lazy import as much as possible.
If import
can hijack,
I assume what you mean is if it can cause a compiler error due
to ambiguity in cross-scope overloading.
Yes, but eve if it doesn't, one need to do a lookup in the
imports to check, which is undesirable.
then it is necessary to process them at least enough to be
able to do first level lookup, even if the import is not used.
Makes sense. So the scenario we are looking at here is
basically local imports in aggregate scopes, such that the
imported symbols are not used in method signatures? Are those
common enough to improve performance sufficiently to justify
influencing the choice of best semantics? (There are 0 cases in
my own code.)
On the long run, it is typical for code to have unused imports,
especially since we have no linter to warn about them.
