I personally find the reversed order of imports such as in python or typescript
very unnatural. Consider tools that could suggest what is available to import.
You first write the module for them to work, don't you? At least I do write
'import {} from module' in typescript and only then choose
Thanks for the details! Makes a lot more sense now.
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:58 AM, wrote:
> According to https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/elixir-lang-
> core/GeXNvzzmdps, it seems that if you allow zero arity with & there is
> an ambiguity when parsing the
I do not like the new python-like syntax for import, but to be honest, I do
like to specify functions in `name/arity` instead of `{name, arity}`.
Perhaps we can either build upon the division operator in the AST or we use
the capture syntax as in `import Enum, /2`. This should be just an
addition
Both `import` and `use` will do the require for you.
See: http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/alias-require-and-import.html
Until I read this, I also didn't understand why I didn't need to use
require everywhere.
Allen Madsen
http://www.allenmadsen.com
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Louis
Hi Jaap,
Is your basic concern the
[function: arity]
notation as opposed to the
function/arity
notation used in other places? I mean are you basically asking for the
notation to be unified? If so, would [function/arity, function/arity]
suffice assuming it were supportable? Something
Functions do not need to be required, only macros :)
Cheers,
Louis
On 13 September 2016 at 13:54, eksperimental
wrote:
> Thank you José for your answer,
> so why is so I don't need to require IO and Enum?
>
> $ elixir -e "IO.inspect(Enum.at(1..5, 2))"
> 3
>
>
> On
You always need to require a module before using it. The only exception is
the Kernel module.
*José Valim*
www.plataformatec.com.br
Skype: jv.ptec
Founder and Director of R
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 6:40 AM, eksperimental
wrote:
> I'm hacking Elixir core, and I