Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

recommend explicit using Foo: Foo, ... in package code (was: "using considered harmful") #42080

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open
8 changes: 8 additions & 0 deletions base/docs/basedocs.jl
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -37,6 +37,14 @@ kw"help", kw"Julia", kw"julia", kw""
available for direct use. Names can also be used via dot syntax (e.g. `Foo.foo` to access
the name `foo`), whether they are `export`ed or not.
See the [manual section about modules](@ref modules) for details.

!!! note
When two or more packages/modules export a name and that name does not refer to the
same thing in each of the packages, and the packages are loaded via `using` without
an explicit list of names, it is an error to reference that name without qualification.
It is thus recommended that code intended to be forward-compatible with future versions
of its dependencies and of Julia, e.g. code in released packages, list the names it
uses from each loaded package, e.g. `using Foo: Foo, f` rather than `using Foo`.
"""
kw"using"

Expand Down
12 changes: 11 additions & 1 deletion doc/src/manual/modules.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ and above. To maintain compatibility with Julia 1.10 and below, use the `@compat

### Standalone `using` and `import`

Possibly the most common way of loading a module is `using ModuleName`. This [loads](@ref
For interactive use, the most common way of loading a module is `using ModuleName`. This [loads](@ref
code-loading) the code associated with `ModuleName`, and brings

1. the module name
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -168,6 +168,16 @@ Importantly, the module name `NiceStuff` will *not* be in the namespace. If you
julia> using .NiceStuff: nice, DOG, NiceStuff
```

Qualifying the names being used as in `using Foo: Foo, f` is
recommended over plain `using Foo` for released packages, and other
code which is meant to be re-used in the future with updated dependencies
or future versions of julia.

The reason for this is if another dependency starts to export one of the
same names as `Foo` and you attempt to use that name, then previously working
code will error due to an ambiguity in which package the name should be
taken from.
Comment on lines +171 to +179
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Synchronizing the wording between the docstring and the manual

Suggested change
Qualifying the names being used as in `using Foo: Foo, f` is
recommended over plain `using Foo` for released packages, and other
code which is meant to be re-used in the future with updated dependencies
or future versions of julia.
The reason for this is if another dependency starts to export one of the
same names as `Foo` and you attempt to use that name, then previously working
code will error due to an ambiguity in which package the name should be
taken from.
When two or more packages/modules export a name and that name does not refer to the
same thing in each of the packages, and the packages are loaded via `using` without
an explicit list of names, it is an error to reference that name without qualification.
It is thus recommended that code intended to be forward-compatible with future versions
of its dependencies and of Julia, e.g. code in released packages, list the names it
uses from each loaded package, e.g. `using Foo: Foo, f` rather than `using Foo`.


Julia has two forms for seemingly the same thing because only `import ModuleName: f` allows adding methods to `f`
*without a module path*.
That is to say, the following example will give an error:
Expand Down