"Robert Clipsham" <rob...@octarineparrot.com> wrote in message news:jl4l5t$2m62$1...@digitalmars.com... > On 30/03/2012 15:46, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >> Starting a new thread from one in announce: >> >> http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP16 >> >> Please comment, after which Walter will approve. Walter's approval means >> that he would approve a pull request implementing DIP16 (subject to >> regular correctness checks). >> >> >> Destroy! >> >> Andrei > > The proposal doesn't say what happens when package.d is not found but > foo/bar/ exists. > > Given that a lot of people will just use public import foo.bar.*; in that > file, would it make sense for package.d missing to imply import foo.bar.*? > That would save typing out every single file in there. Of course it would > also be annoying if you wanted to import everything except one file, as > you'd then have to type out every single import anyway. >
That would effectively be the same as Java's "import foo.*" and a lot of people have issues with that. > The other option is to error, which is probably a more sane option. > That's what I'd suggest doing. Just treat it like importing any other missing package.
