Summary of progress

[Simon Marlow]

> Johannes Waldmann wrote:
> >=20
> > > Such Foo.Bar module is not defined explicitly, but results from
> > > having a subdirectory in import directories. Contents of=20
> all Foo.Bar
> > > directories from all import directory roots are merged to=20
> form such
> > > pseudo-module which contains nothing but modules.
> >=20
> > Yes, very good. That's what I wanted. Do the implementors aggree?
>=20
> Personally, I don't like the idea at all.  :-)  I don't see the need
> to bring whole namespaces into scope.  And even if I did, I wouldn't
> overload the standard import syntax to mean namespace scoping=20
> as well -
> an entirely different syntax would be better, e.g.
>=20
>     namespace Foo.Bar
>     namespace A.B
>     import Baz			-- gets Foo.Bar.Baz or=20
> A.B.Baz or both.

I'm not sure about the idea either, mainly because I don't know how to
reconcile it with the other possible semantics for importing a non-leaf
node of the hierarchy.  See the notes with my layout proposal for more
details.

Cheers,
	Simon