IIUC, there were two reasons for deprecating require: - many people complained about the slew of related concepts (include, require, reload, using, import). require seems like the easiest of these to eliminate.
- Package precompilation. It was quite ambiguous whether require(filename) should defer to the precompiled file or the source code. However, now that we have timestamp checks to ensure these are in sync with each other, I'm not sure that argument is relevant anymore. However, modules really should be "static" (containers of code, not of data), so perhaps use of modules indicates that the deprecation is a good idea on its own merits. Does my reply to Christopher about the anonymous functions help with your use case? Best, --Tim On Saturday, October 10, 2015 04:08:36 AM Sara Freeman wrote: > I've encountered a similar problem, but do not have a solution to report. > > I'm not sure why require was depreciated. It worked quite well. > > On Friday, October 9, 2015 at 10:35:20 AM UTC-4, Christopher Fisher wrote: > > Hi all- > > > > I am trying to load a file of functions on a cluster of computers. In the > > past, I used require() (now depreciated) and the sendto() function > > described here > > <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27677399/julia-how-to-copy-data-to-ano > > ther-processor-in-julia>to make a data variable available on all workers. > > ( Note that I cannot simply load the data upon initializing the program > > because the data will change outside of the module, eventually receiving > > a stream of data from another program. So speed and flexibility is > > imperative). As recommended here > > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/julia-users/$20require/julia-> > > > users/6zBKw4nd20I/5JLt7Ded0zkJ>, I defined a module containing the > > functions and used "using MyModule" to send it to the available workers. > > It seems that the major limitation of this approach is that data is not > > available to the functions within the module when using sendto(). I > > suspect this is because modules are > > encapsulated from other variables and functions. Bearing that in mind: > > > > > > 1. Is there a way around this problem using the module method? > > > > 2. Alternatively, is there a way I can make the functions and packages > > available to the workers without using modules? Perhaps something akin to > > the old require method? > > > > 3. Or is there a way to send the data via map() along with my function and > > distributed array? Essentially, my code loads stored inputs for numerous > > kernel density functions and converts them to a distributed array of > > arrays. For example: > > > > map(EvalKDFs,MyDistArray) > > > > Each time the above function is called, "MyData" needs to be available to > > the function EvalKDFs. However, map(EvalKDFs,MyDistArray,MyData) does not > > work because there is one array of data and many arrays within > > MyDistArray. > > > > I might be able to post a stripped down version of my code if my > > description does not suffice. > > > > Any help would be greatly appreciated.
