http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP15

On 2011-10-18 09:38, Martin Nowak wrote:
> http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP15

What's the advantage of this compared to importing the "_.d" file explicitly, i.e. "import pkg._;" ?

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

1. Standardized and guaranteed to work in a similar manner every time.
2. Less eye-trash in the code.
3. Opportunity to improve semantics of importing a package without
needing to refactor lots of code.

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:
> On 2011-10-18 09:38, Martin Nowak wrote:
>>
>> http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP15
>
> What's the advantage of this compared to importing the "_.d" file explicitly, i.e. "import pkg._;" ?
>
> --
> /Jacob Carlborg
>

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:27:18 +0200, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:

> On 2011-10-18 09:38, Martin Nowak wrote:
>> http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP15
>
> What's the advantage of this compared to importing the "_.d" file explicitly, i.e. "import pkg._;" ?
>

It is a paradigm shift to import a package.
Consider import std with a small sensible collection
of defaults from std.stdio, std.range and std.algorithm.
Or import gtkd and giving the library writer a defined place
for startup hooks. Also this scales much better to import
packages from non-directories, e.g. zip files or urls.

The other keypoint is that you have a simple way to obtain a packages symbol.
This symbol can be handled as any other symbol,
e.g. apply protection, pass it as template parameter or alias different packages based on a version tag.
Most of this is already possible but requires you to import a submodule to obtain the package symbol.

martin

On 2011-10-18 13:40, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
> 1. Standardized and guaranteed to work in a similar manner every time.
> 2. Less eye-trash in the code.
> 3. Opportunity to improve semantics of importing a package without
> needing to refactor lots of code.

Ok, makes sense. Although, I would prefer if this "_.d" file wouldn't need to be created manually.

> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Jacob Carlborg<doob@me.com>  wrote:
>> On 2011-10-18 09:38, Martin Nowak wrote:
>>>
>>> http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP15
>>
>> What's the advantage of this compared to importing the "_.d" file
>> explicitly, i.e. "import pkg._;" ?
>>
>> --
>> /Jacob Carlborg
>>


-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

How do you imagine the process of importing a package without having a dedicated "default" module for it?

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:
> On 2011-10-18 13:40, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>>
>> 1. Standardized and guaranteed to work in a similar manner every time.
>> 2. Less eye-trash in the code.
>> 3. Opportunity to improve semantics of importing a package without
>> needing to refactor lots of code.
>
> Ok, makes sense. Although, I would prefer if this "_.d" file wouldn't need to be created manually.
>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Jacob Carlborg<doob@me.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2011-10-18 09:38, Martin Nowak wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP15
>>>
>>> What's the advantage of this compared to importing the "_.d" file explicitly, i.e. "import pkg._;" ?
>>>
>>> --
>>> /Jacob Carlborg
>>>
>
>
> --
> /Jacob Carlborg
>

On 2011-10-18 16:50, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
> How do you imagine the process of importing a package without having a
> dedicated "default" module for it?

I have no idea. What about how it works in other languages that support this, i.e. Java and Scala. At least it would be nice to have.


-- 
/Jacob Carlborg