On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:
On Sunday, 18 August 2013 at 09:52:29 UTC, Timothee Cour wrote:
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <
joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:

On Sunday, 18 August 2013 at 01:33:51 UTC, Timothee Cour wrote:
granted, that's not ideal. How about the other points I mentioned?
void fun(){
version=A;
version(none):
}

Not sure I understand what you're trying to achieve there.

goal1: avoid polluting global module name space:
void fun(){
version=A;
//now the code below in fun() scope has version(A) set
}

goal2:
void fun(){
version(none):
//all the code below this IN THIS FUNCTION becomes versioned out
//(avoids requiring extra {} scope
}

 
But as an alternative to function-local import, why not split your module into a package, with submodules mymodule.bardependent and mymodule.nonbardependent ... ?