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.
