I'm generally in favor of the proposal, but I figured I should mention one situation when I personally might find this confusing. If the module import list is very long, and includes an unrestricted import of a well-known module, it might be easy to assume a certain well-known function comes from there, when in fact it comes from some other module on the other end of the import list. On Oct 18, 2014 6:39 PM, "Joachim Breitner" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > Am Samstag, den 18.10.2014, 11:02 -0700 schrieb htebalaka: > > I guess my central point is I don't see how anyone can benefit from the > > current behaviour. For instance, a simple real world example: > > > > import Prelude > > import Data.Text.Lazy.IO (putStrLn) > > I find this quite convincing. If I bother to explicitly write out „take > putStrLn from Data.Text.Lazy.IO“, why should the compiler assume that I > might have meant some putStrLn from somewhere else. > > Of course, order should not matter (I don’t think anyone suggested it > should, I think Austin simply mis-read that). > > Greetings, > Joachim > > > -- > Joachim “nomeata” Breitner > [email protected] • http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ > Jabber: [email protected] • GPG-Key: 0xF0FBF51F > Debian Developer: [email protected] > > > _______________________________________________ > Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users > >
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
