• Tom (4/4) Nov 22 2005 I wonder why the following syntax isn't available in D:
• John Demme (7/16) Nov 22 2005 Walter has stated in the past that he is opposed to this idea as merely
• Tom (3/19) Nov 22 2005 Tom
• John Demme (7/33) Nov 22 2005 Well, Java only kinda suffers from the problem. With Java, all you're
• Alan West (8/13) Nov 23 2005 I'd prefer to be able to create a module 'somepackage/somesubpackage.d'
• Derek Parnell (8/13) Nov 22 2005 Not for me. I prefer knowing what is being imported, and telling future

Tom <Tom_member pathlink.com> writes:

I wonder why the following syntax isn't available in D:

import somepackage.somesubpackage.*; // Import every module of the package.

Wouldn't this be useful? (just like in Java)


Tom

John Demme <me teqdruid.com> writes:

Walter has stated in the past that he is opposed to this idea as merely
putting something in the directory could lead to conflicts and other
unexpected changes.  I agree with him.  When I feel I want something like
this, I create an somepackage/somesubpackage/all.d which public imports
everything in that directory.

~John

Tom wrote:

 I wonder why the following syntax isn't available in D:
 
 import somepackage.somesubpackage.*; // Import every module of the
 package.
 
 Wouldn't this be useful? (just like in Java)
 
 
 Tom

Tom <Tom_member pathlink.com> writes:

In article <dm07m8$31c6$1 digitaldaemon.com>, John Demme says...
Walter has stated in the past that he is opposed to this idea as merely
putting something in the directory could lead to conflicts and other
unexpected changes.  I agree with him.  When I feel I want something like
this, I create an somepackage/somesubpackage/all.d which public imports
everything in that directory.

So Java suffers from the same problem I guess. Never thought about it.

~John

Tom wrote:

 I wonder why the following syntax isn't available in D:
 
 import somepackage.somesubpackage.*; // Import every module of the
 package.
 
 Wouldn't this be useful? (just like in Java)
 
 
 Tom


Tom

John Demme <me teqdruid.com> writes:

Well, Java only kinda suffers from the problem.  With Java, all you're
importing is classes.  It's much worse with D.  Since an import can bring
many, many symbols into the current namespace, the problem is potentially
much worse- we're not talking about just classes now, but every single
non-private symbol at the module level that can come in.

~John

Tom wrote:

 In article <dm07m8$31c6$1 digitaldaemon.com>, John Demme says...
Walter has stated in the past that he is opposed to this idea as merely
putting something in the directory could lead to conflicts and other
unexpected changes.  I agree with him.  When I feel I want something like
this, I create an somepackage/somesubpackage/all.d which public imports
everything in that directory.

 
 So Java suffers from the same problem I guess. Never thought about it.
 
~John

Tom wrote:

 I wonder why the following syntax isn't available in D:
 
 import somepackage.somesubpackage.*; // Import every module of the
 package.
 
 Wouldn't this be useful? (just like in Java)
 
 
 Tom


 
 Tom

Alan West <alan alanz.com> writes:

John Demme wrote:
 Walter has stated in the past that he is opposed to this idea as merely
 putting something in the directory could lead to conflicts and other
 unexpected changes.  I agree with him.  When I feel I want something like
 this, I create an somepackage/somesubpackage/all.d which public imports
 everything in that directory.

I'd prefer to be able to create a module 'somepackage/somesubpackage.d' 
for a 'somepackage/somesubpackage/' to public import items in that 
directory.

Currently this throws up an error though, I get the impression the D 
compiler checks first for isdir("somepackage/somesubpackage"), rather 
than isfile("somepackage/somesubpackage" ~ ".d").

Is this a minor bug or feature?

Derek Parnell <derek psych.ward> writes:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:25:37 +0000 (UTC), Tom wrote:

 I wonder why the following syntax isn't available in D:
 
 import somepackage.somesubpackage.*; // Import every module of the package.
 
 Wouldn't this be useful? (just like in Java)

Not for me. I prefer knowing what is being imported, and telling future
maintainers what I was expected to be imported.

-- 
Derek
(skype: derek.j.parnell)
Melbourne, Australia
23/11/2005 11:10:24 AM