In C++, I have always wanted to define a priorty for namespaces.  For example:

namespace foo
{
int x;
}

namespace bar
{
int x;
}

// The C++ way...
using namespace std;
using namespace foo;
using namespace bar;
foo::x = bar::x;

// My way...
// namespaces are in priority order...
using namespace std, foo, bar;
x = bar::x; // foo is implicit because the priority is explicity defined..

So, if you import a module in D, it would be nice to set explicit priorities and assume that the current module has priority over the imported module. Comments on my rambling?





_________________________________________________

Robert Sitton

Software Engineer & Digital Holographer

clockwork@austin.rr.com



"Some engineers code to live, but I live to code..."



www.zebraimaging.com www.apple.com www.nintendo.com

D Man wrote in message <9lkub4$309p$1@digitaldaemon.com>...
>So, if you import a module in D, it would be nice to set explicit
priorities
>and assume that the current module has priority over the imported module. Comments on my rambling?


In D, the current module has priority over imported modules. All imported modules have equal priority, which means if there's an ambiguity, you'll need to resolve it by prefixing the reference with "modulename."

Walter wrote:
> 
> D Man wrote in message <9lkub4$309p$1@digitaldaemon.com>...
> >So, if you import a module in D, it would be nice to set explicit
> priorities
> >and assume that the current module has priority over the imported module. Comments on my rambling?
> 
> In D, the current module has priority over imported modules. All imported modules have equal priority, which means if there's an ambiguity, you'll need to resolve it by prefixing the reference with "modulename."

	You currently import all the symbols from a module into the current
namespace.  Would you be opposed to adding a syntax to select only
sertain symbols to be inserted into the local namespace, or to have no
symbols (other than the module name itself) inserted?  It might even be
nice to have the compiler tell you if you are explictly importing
symbols that you don't use so you can tell when you've removed the need
for a module.
	The ability to select where you get your symbols will also prevent the
situation when you code uses symbols from a module A and and later you
and a module B for added features.  If names clash, you then have to go
find and qualify all offending symbols.
	I do believe you should also keep the current ability to grab
everything since this will be handy for small quick projects.  I've just
always thought that senseless namespace polutions was generally bad.

Dan

"Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9lkvr5$317f$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> D Man wrote in message <9lkub4$309p$1@digitaldaemon.com>...
> >So, if you import a module in D, it would be nice to set explicit
> priorities
> >and assume that the current module has priority over the imported module. Comments on my rambling?
>
>
> In D, the current module has priority over imported modules. All imported modules have equal priority, which means if there's an ambiguity, you'll need to resolve it by prefixing the reference with "modulename."
>
>

For more insight on this, I suggest taking a look at the "More useful (but complex) imports" thread.  There's discussion of the Java import model that potentially takes care of some of these problems.

-Brady