On 16 October 2012 02:39, 1100110 <0b1100...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 13:38:31 -0500, Chris Nicholson-Sauls < > ibisbase...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday, 15 October 2012 at 15:37:06 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >> >>> I don't think imports from a specific package have been considered. >>> >>> In my personal opinion, imports are a necessary evil and it's sort of a >>> bummer that the most accessible place in any source file - the top lines - >>> is occupied by the crappy legal disclaimer (which, after having talked to a >>> lawyer, I always put at the bottom since being at the top is not a >>> requirement), and the litany of imports that the module is using. I'd make >>> all imports local or put them at the bottom of the file if it weren't too >>> much of a shock to others. >>> >>> Three remarks on this particular problem. >>> >>> 1. I expect large packages to introduce a module "all.di" or "_.di" to >>> publicly import everything in the package. That could help some use cases. >>> >> >> It is a common practice (usually all.di) but perhaps it could help to >> establish an official convention. Nothing in the language, just the >> styleguide. (I know this has already come up and been discussed.) >> > > I like what vibe.d did by having an import all file named d.d > > Therefore you can: > import vibe.d; > > It's nice, it's clean, and I've blatantly stolen it for a few of my own > projects. >
O_O .. That might be one of the worst things I've ever seen! It doesn't even make sense. Is there actually a vibe.d file? And why try to make the import statement look like a source filename?