After chatting with Alex Crichton on IRC, it turns out `use crate` was actually rejected. It just wasn't captured properly in the notes.
Apparently the current leading proposal is `extern crate foo`. This still has the problem of defining a new limited-scope keyword, but it's better than `use crate foo`. -Kevin On Dec 17, 2013, at 12:19 PM, Kevin Ballard <ke...@sb.org> wrote: > In today's meeting[1], it appears as though `extern mod foo` may become `use > crate foo`. I have a minor worry about this, which is reserving yet another > keyword for a very limited usage. My general feeling is we shouldn't be > adding keywords unnecessarily, especially if their scope is extremely > limited. And unlike the `in` from `for _ in _`, this one can't be made > contextual (if we ever decide to go that route), because doing so would allow > `mod crate`, which would then make `use crate` ambiguous. > > One suggestion I didn't see in the meeting, that seems reasonable to me, is > `extern use`, as in > > extern use foo; > > This doesn't reserve any new keywords, and it also ties in nicely with the > idea that we're linking to something external. It also seems to emphasize the > right thing, which is that we're trying to pull in something external. The > fact that the thing we're pulling in is a crate seems less important than the > fact that it's an external thing that we need to link to. > > -Kevin > > [1]: https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Meeting-weekly-2013-12-17 _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
