brendan at mozilla.org
Mon Oct 15 14:27:14 PDT 2012
Have to say I agree with Kevin and Yehuda here, on implicit declaration
(not export or import) being better. Not saying I'm sold on the whole
idea, but I feel the pain.
The module-wide scope is pretty much Dart. Anyone using Dart much want
to comment on how that's worked out?
Yehuda Katz wrote:
> Yehuda Katz
> (ph) 718.877.1325
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Kevin Smith <khs4473 at gmail.com
> <mailto:khs4473 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> For the case of importing "37" at-names, I would expect that *
> imports would take care of it:
> import * from ModuleDefining37NameInterface;
> Oh, come on!
> The problem isn't importing the names. The problem lies in having
> to maintain a nightmarishly long set of declarations which are
> **completely internal to the module**, not exported and not imported.
> This is essentially the problem I had when I tried to port existing
> code. It was especially annoying because it was easy to forget to
> create and maintain the declarations.
> The more I think about it, the more I think that scoping symbols to
> modules would work well. Does that mean symbols are simply disallowed
> outside of modules?
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
More information about the es-discuss