how about this:

variant 1 // currently legal D; just need to attach semantics

```

// applies to all below

@deps!({import std.stdio; pragma(lib, "curl"); }):

// applies to 1 below

@deps!({import std.range})

void fun(T)(isInputRange!T){} // depends on both deps

void fun2(File file){} // depends on 1st deps ending with ':'

```

variant 2: //currently legal if not ending with ':' as above; less noisy syntax

@deps{import std.stdio; pragma(lib, "curl"); }

@deps{import std.stdio; pragma(lib, "curl"); }: // applies to all below

Advantages:

* no new syntax (just new semantics)

* no nesting inside {}

* allows grouping multiple declarations under a single set of imports

* `grep import` will still work unlike many of the existing proposals

* can use existing traits to query for such imports (eg getSymbolsByUDA)

* allows a more general solution (eg also handles `pragma(lib, "curl");` if we want that as well)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 4:54 PM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 00:29:17 UTC, Chris M wrote:

For the "with" keyword, why is the import statement kept? Seems unnecessary to keep it.

void process(File input) import std.stdio;
struct Buffered(Range) if (isInputRange!Range)
with (std.range)
{
...
}

to not block future uses of such `with` syntax for different purposes. and (which is more important for me, for example) to make greping easier. and to keep `with` semantics: it should introduce scope over *existing* things. explicit `import` brings the module to the existance. choose any options you like. ;-)