Thread overview | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
March 07, 2014 [Issue 12314] New: Allow Duplicate Renamed Imports | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12314 Summary: Allow Duplicate Renamed Imports Product: D Version: D2 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: nobody@puremagic.com ReportedBy: jbinero@gmail.com --- Comment #0 from Jeroen Bollen <jbinero@gmail.com> 2014-03-07 12:19:54 PST --- It should be allowed for renaming the same import twice, with the same name. // This should be possible private import gtk = gtk.Application; private import gtk = gtk.Window; -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- |
March 07, 2014 [Issue 12314] Allow Duplicate Renamed Imports | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jeroen Bollen | https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12314 bearophile_hugs@eml.cc changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bearophile_hugs@eml.cc --- Comment #1 from bearophile_hugs@eml.cc 2014-03-07 13:06:25 PST --- (In reply to comment #0) > It should be allowed for renaming the same import twice, with the same name. > > // This should be possible > private import gtk = gtk.Application; > private import gtk = gtk.Window; Please list what are the advantages an disadvantages of this proposal. (At first sight I don't like it, but perhaps I am wrong). -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- |
March 07, 2014 [Issue 12314] Allow Duplicate Renamed Imports | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jeroen Bollen | https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12314 --- Comment #2 from Jeroen Bollen <jbinero@gmail.com> 2014-03-07 13:10:07 PST --- (In reply to comment #1) > Please list what are the advantages an disadvantages of this proposal. (At first sight I don't like it, but perhaps I am wrong). The main advantage is that when you have libraries like the GtkD which I used in the first post, you can put them all in one namespace. This way you don't get the redundancy of specifying the exact module name for every call to a function, but you still keep your code clean and maintainable by specifying what library a certain class/struct/object belongs to. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- |
March 07, 2014 [Issue 12314] Allow Duplicate Renamed Imports | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jeroen Bollen | https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12314 --- Comment #3 from bearophile_hugs@eml.cc 2014-03-07 13:24:32 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Please list what are the advantages an disadvantages of this proposal. (At first sight I don't like it, but perhaps I am wrong). > > The main advantage is that when you have libraries like the GtkD which I used in the first post, you can put them all in one namespace. > > This way you don't get the redundancy of specifying the exact module name for every call to a function, but you still keep your code clean and maintainable by specifying what library a certain class/struct/object belongs to. What are the disadvantages? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- |
March 07, 2014 [Issue 12314] Allow Duplicate Renamed Imports | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jeroen Bollen | https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12314 --- Comment #4 from Jeroen Bollen <jbinero@gmail.com> 2014-03-07 13:26:21 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > The main advantage is that when you have libraries like the GtkD which I used in the first post, you can put them all in one namespace. > > > > This way you don't get the redundancy of specifying the exact module name for every call to a function, but you still keep your code clean and maintainable by specifying what library a certain class/struct/object belongs to. > > What are the disadvantages? I can't really think of any. Obviously it can cause conflicts if you have two matching symbols and you put them in the same module/namespace; but conflicts are already possible as-is, and should be avoided. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- |
March 07, 2014 [Issue 12314] Allow Duplicate Renamed Imports | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jeroen Bollen | https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12314 Vladimir Panteleev <thecybershadow@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |thecybershadow@gmail.com --- Comment #5 from Vladimir Panteleev <thecybershadow@gmail.com> 2014-03-07 23:28:17 EET --- How is this different from a package.d file? -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- |
March 07, 2014 [Issue 12314] Allow Duplicate Renamed Imports | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jeroen Bollen | https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12314 --- Comment #6 from Jeroen Bollen <jbinero@gmail.com> 2014-03-07 13:33:17 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) > How is this different from a package.d file? You mean having a separate module publicly importing all the required modules? The difference would be that not a separate module would be needed for every different set of includes possible. Obviously you could make one file simply importing everything, but that'd just be an over-kill. When a module only uses 2 or 3 modules it's not worth importing every single one of them. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation