>>>>> "GMcM" == Gordon McMillan <gmcm@hypernet.com> writes:
[snipped off other issues raised]
>> The current runtime overhead isn't so bad.
GMcM> Under anything near normal usage, no - packages structures
GMcM> are nearly always shallow. It wouldn't be much work to
GMcM> construct a case where time spent in import doubled,
GMcM> however.
But that can be said of almost anything. A nicer question to ask is
-- for most circumstances (99%) is the import mechanism fast enough?
GMcM> When the "try relative, then try absolute" strategy was
GMcM> introduced with packages, it added insignificant
GMcM> overhead. It's not so insignificant now. When (and if) the
GMcM> standard library moves to a package structure, it's possilbe
GMcM> it will be seen as a burden.
Yes, which is why maybe adding an 'rimport' keyword (which you
suggested) would be a more conservative option?
prabhu
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4