# Implicitly loaded modules in the future?

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/implicitly-loaded-modules-in-the-future/62646>\
**Category:** Internals & Design\
**Tags:** question, module, code-organization\
**Created:** [June 9, 2021, 8:58pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/implicitly-loaded-modules-in-the-future/62646 "2021-06-09T20:58:00Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 15

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PetrKryslUCSD](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/petrkryslucsd/32/215825_2.png) [@PetrKryslUCSD](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/PetrKryslUCSD)\
**Post date:** [July 1, 2021, 2:55pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/implicitly-loaded-modules-in-the-future/62646/284 "2021-07-01T14:55:39Z")

</div>

> [@mhinsch](#):
>
> Of course, as usual, none of this would be necessary if we assumed a perfect genius programmer, but then that perfect genius programmer wouldn’t need Julia but could just write in assembly. In a way most of what happened in applied computer science since the 50s or so is developing cognitive crutches for imperfect humans.

I think the genius programmer will be more productive in a high level language. Computers are good at writing assembly; people are good at writing high level language code, whether they be genius or not. The genius programmer is then distinguished by being able to descend to the level of assembly code when needed (read: when such optimization pays off).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![fkjogu](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/fkjogu/32/2416_2.png) [@fkjogu](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/fkjogu)\
**Post date:** [May 4, 2022, 12:47pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/implicitly-loaded-modules-in-the-future/62646/285 "2022-05-04T12:47:28Z")

</div>

> [@CameronBieganek](#):
>
> An import statement like `from A import foo` implies that everything I need to know about `foo` can be found in `A` , but it’s just not true—not even close to being true.

Hey, can you elaborate this statement, please? In a world, where you would have to explicitly import every version of `foo`, wouldn’t you know exactly what where to lookup the information concerning foo?

So basically, if you have to declare something along

```julia
from A import foo
from B import foo

```

you would be guaranteed that the dispatcher only uses `A.foo` and `B.foo` and nothing else, wouldn’t it?

I think the appeal of having explicit namespacing and importing is that you have control over the interactions. If everything lives in one gigantic namespace, I find it harder to trace every occurrence of a method (yes, tooling can help here, however it is no guarantee). Especially in a foreign code base that could be suprising, couldn’t it?

[Previous page](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/implicitly-loaded-modules-in-the-future/62646.md?page=14)