I find the modules implementation in Julia the most annoying “feature” of the language. For large projects it makes sense that developers would want to organise their code in separate modules (not packages), each one in a separate directory with a number of files. But, in Julia the executed code sh…

[image] stevengj: they currently accomplish this in Julia mainly through modules segregated into packages Perhaps my lack of understanding comes from not seeing this as a problem, but a good practice (that, perhaps, evolved somewhat accidentally). Packaging up some sub-functionality with a cl…

[image] Tamas_Papp: A lot of organizations now maintain a network of 20+ interconnected packages (SciML, JuliaImages, plenty others). It would be great if their maintainers and principal architects could share their thoughts on this discussion: do they miss the ability to automatically orchestra…

I would note that no-one seems to be advocating monorepos. (Least of all any proponents of this change, as far as I can see.) I don’t see that this is relevant to the discussion. This current discussion about “complex internal structure” seems like a funny one to me. We all agree that we don’t want…

[image] patrick-kidger: I would note that no-one seems to be advocating monorepos. (Least of all any proponents of this change, as far as I can see.) I don’t see that this is relevant to the discussion. I was literally asked, and quoted the question. [image] patrick-kidger: Some folks se…

Sorry for interfere, but this thread is so long and there was so many ideas, that is really hard to understand what features are proposed. Can you give an example, how code is going to look like with proposed features? Small MWE, just to understand what we are talking about and how it differs from …

[image] ChrisRackauckas: I was literally asked, and quoted the question. I don’t read the previous question as having anything to do with monorepos. This discussion has been about explicit declaration of dependencies, which is an entirely different topic. [image] ChrisRackauckas: purpos…

Folks, I haven’t been able to keep up with this conversation but I can assure people that no convincing is needed that there is a feature to be added here. The question is just what that feature should be. It is, of course, perfectly possible to use include the way you can today but that doesn’t mea…

I think we’re at the point where concrete code demos are needed for clarity. It seems like there are two versions being proposed. @patrick-kidger proposes a version that doesn’t use submodules: # master.jl import "A.jl": foo import "B.jl": bar # utils.jl common = 1 # A.jl import "utils.jl": co…

[image] jzr: import "utils.jl": common expands to include("utils.jl") import Utils: common It’s a little more complicated than this because you would want to be able to have multiple import "Utils.jl" statements (possibly from different submodules) and have it end up including the file once …

There is the “sub package” idea: # mypackage.jl using MyPackage.A : foo using MyPackage.B # A.jl subpackage module A foo(x) = 1 end # B.jl subpackage module B bar(x) = 2 end where MyPackage.A and MyPackage.B are: Independent packages that get their own UIDs automatically. Are searched for …

Implicitly loaded modules in the future?

Internals & Design

Topic		Replies	Views
[ANN] PatModules.jl: a better module system for Julia Package Announcements code-organization	70	9975	January 4, 2021
Organization of multiple modules in same package General Usage packages , modules , code-organization	18	5489	May 4, 2021
Proper way of organizing code into subpackages New to Julia packages , code-organization	48	8385	August 24, 2022
How to structure project in julia New to Julia	48	5976	June 5, 2023
How does the module system actually work? New to Julia question , package , first-steps	20	3203	January 21, 2021

Implicitly loaded modules in the future?

Related topics