An off-topic question: Why is it `add`/`import` a package, but `using` instead of `use` it?

WuSiren · April 15, 2024, 5:44am

An off-topic question: Why is it add/import a package, but using instead of use it?

jar1 · April 15, 2024, 5:47am

github.com/JuliaLang/julia

2.0: just one import keyword

opened 08:11PM - 13 Jan 21 UTC

StefanKarpinski

speculative breaking

I would very much like to have just one import keyword in Julia 2.0. I don't muc…h care if it's `import` or `using` but since we talk about it as "importing" things, that may be more natural. With https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/39187 and some requirement for explicitly requesting extension of external generic functions, this would be possible. | current form | new form | comment | |---|---|---| | `import Foo` | `import Foo` | just imports `Foo` | | `import Foo: Foo, bar` | `import Foo: bar` | in 2.0 `import Foo: bar` imports `Foo` also | | `import Foo: bar` | `import Foo as _: bar` | use `Foo as _` to discard that name | | `using Foo` | `import Foo...` | | | `using Foo` | `import Foo: ...` | longer version of the previous one | | `using Foo; using Foo: bar` | `import Foo: bar, ...` | implicit and explicit imports on one line | | `using Foo as _` | `import Foo as _: ...` | use `Foo as _` to discard that name | In 2.0 I think we should eliminate the distinction between the "soft binding" that `using` creates and the hard binding that `import` creates and just make all explicit bindings hard and all implicit bindings soft: if you asked for it by name, it's a hard binding, if you didn't, it's a soft binding. When someone wants to extend an implicitly imported generic function, they have to fully qualify it.

mkitti · April 16, 2024, 1:25am

using as a keyword has some precedence in C# and C++ usually having to do with namespaces.

jar1 · April 16, 2024, 1:28am

It’s a fair point, though: using/importing or use/import are better pairings.