[Import-sig] Re: Proposal for a modified import mechanism.
Prabhu Ramachandran <email@example.com>
Sun, 11 Nov 2001 13:38:18 +0530
>>>>> "GMcM" == Gordon McMillan <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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,
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?