On 2026-09-09 20:12, bart wrote:Why? What is the advantage of so much micromanagement?On 09/09/2026 02:59, Waldek Hebisch wrote:I fear you're just exposing your very limited perception and experience[...]>
Some even specify individual names to be imported from a module. What a complete waste of time!
here. (And en passant probably also the mindset of a technocratic paper
pusher than a software designer.)
Myself I'm favoring _to be able_ to import only what I need and not the
whole bunch of existing things of a module (with all potential implicit
and explicit consequences).
Is even the pain of having to do '#include <string.h>' not enough when your code uses string functions, you would prefer to list them individually too?!
With other languages, do you also need to specify importing individual variables, enumerations, types, structs and macros?
An enumeration set may have hundreds of names; do you have to list all of them? That would be insane.
I'd originally complained about having to list modules individually in in each file; this would be literally magnitudes worse.
You might as well put each entity into its own module, and have a subset of 1000 modules to manage instead - in each of the 1000 functions.
You people seem to like making life difficult. Well, go ahead!
> Myself I'm favoring _to be able_ to import only what I need and not the
> whole bunch of existing things of a module (with all potential implicit
> and explicit consequences).
Which consequences are these? If there's too much unrelated stuff in a module, that suggests it is poorly structured.
If you import modules A and B, and use functions from each, but some may clash (say you want F from A but not F from B), then that's not a problem because you will say A.F or B.F.
If you want to use 'using' because you don't want to type 'A.' or 'B.', just F and it will be from a specific import, that /that/ would be bad form. In any case, there are better ways.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.