I want to formalize a julep for a design idea, I am asking the help of the community , please read and criticise freely. The problems it is addressing: Type piracy: It is too easy to break code in module M, even without directly evaluating code into it, by adding methods to Base functions or any…

[image] ChrisRackauckas: If the function is actually doing something different, give it a different name. That is only because namespaces right now are used (loosely) to represent concepts, where they are more formally defined in other languages. There is no reason that there can only be a s…

[image] mbauman: Sure there is, its name is Julia. No doubt it is the closest, and perhaps it is the only possible approach! In Haskell you can’t even have the same field names between types. [image] mbauman: We don’t require merging functions, and jamming puns into Base functions reall…

[image] jlperla: So you get to use solve in differential equations and the next package that comes around and just wanted to use the word “solve” has to pick a different function? What about operators used in base? Everything in Julia has its namespace as part of the name. Another way to pick…

[image] jlperla: In single-dispatch languages, the basic lookup rule is that whatever the namespace of the type you use as the first argument determines the relevant set of methods for a given function. The natural generalization of this is that with multi-dispatch, is that the namespaces of the…

[image] PetrKryslUCSD: using AModule except thisfun andthatfun where except would be a keyword. It would accept the export of all symbols from AModule except thisfun and andthatfun . That’s part of the functionality that I’d like to have available via @api that I’m working on, as well as ren…

[image] StefanKarpinski: ADL is strictly a static name disambiguation done at compile time. In other words, in C++ there is always an equivalent program you could have written without ADL using fully qualified function names. This is not a trivial difference and it means that suggesting that ADL…

[image] jlperla: But the main reason is that the advice people keep giving on discourse (“stop using using and import your functions”) contradicts with the reality that operators (and some functions?) are unusable without a using. I still don’t get this. In what way are operators and function…

[image] StefanKarpinski: Doing dynamic name resolution and dynamic dispatch on all of the arguments is not at all like C++’s ADL… it’s not like anything in any language that exists, It is exactly what is done in GAP, at least.

[image] StefanKarpinski: Another would be automatic function merging when different functions with the same name are brought into scope by using . This together with a dialect like using except ... looks perfect to me.

I think Jeff has hit the nail on the head here: the original proposal in this thread (which has been derailed with more ADL discussion) is fundamentally about dynamic scoping . In essence, it seems that in the proposal, which function is called is dynamically scoped (other variables remain lexically …

Julep: Taking multiple dispatch,export,import,binary compilation seriously

Internals & Design

Topic		Replies	Views
Function name conflict: ADL / function merging? Internals & Design proposal , namespaces	212	15263	April 30, 2018
Possibility of `local import` statements in future? Internals & Design scope	63	4113	May 2, 2018
"Meaning", type-piracy, and method merging Internals & Design type-piracy	68	5535	June 3, 2018
Proposal for SharedFunctions.jl package for optional dependency management Internals & Design	74	6043	May 7, 2019
Is Julia's way of OOP superior to C++/Python? Why Julia doesn't use class-based OOP? Internals & Design	146	34148	October 11, 2021

Julep: Taking multiple dispatch,export,import,binary compilation seriously

Related topics