On 02/16/12 15:10, James Miller wrote: > I'm not sure what you are talking about, maybe explaining the terms > and concreting down what you mean would help. Try posting a code > example, demonstrating what you mean, rather than just throwing words > around. > > There are various reasons why imports work they way they do, one of > which is that D is supposed to be friendly to C/C++ programmers, so > `import` behaves, on the surface, like `#include`. > > If you want to only use the fully qualified names, just use `static > import`, as far as I can tell, that is exactly what you want.
I gave an example in the first message -- just having an "import" statement with a basename equal to the current filename (minus the '.d' suffix) already breaks. "static import" does not import the module's symbols into the current scope. It's not about finding a workaround, it's about fixing a design flaw. (which wouldn't be 100% backwards compatible, but perfectly acceptable at this stage) artur