Re: Re: import/use last call

Marcus Boerger wrote: > Hello Sebastian, > > erm you are not going to use the stuff then? Of course. I was just trying to explain what the plain words sound like. > marcus > > Wednesday, October 24, 2007, 8:11:50 AM, you wrote: > >> Gregory Beaver wrote: >>> Giedrius D wrote: >>>> On 10/23/07, Gregory Beaver <greg@chiaraquartet.net> wrote: > >>>> Anyway my main question was: is there any reason not to use keyword >>>> "use"? > >>> The only reason for me is that "use" implies some kind of autoloading, >>> as I suggested in one of my other mails. This gets into parsing >>> semantics, something I'm not interested in doing. If the folks go with >>> "use" that is fine, but for me personally not the best solution, which >>> is why I put hours into making this patch. > >> If I directly compare "use" with "import", "import" sounds >> way more like >> "get me that stuff somehow magically" than "use" does. > - Sebastian