we should really stop using C# namespaces and start using static classes as ‘modules’
you can import qualified:
using Renamed = SomeModule;
or you can import unqualified:
using static SomeModule;
Conversation
Can static classes have type members in C#?
1
1
yes, you can nest types, but there’s no facility to abstract over this; e.g. you can’t put an interface on a static type and there’s also no way to have an associated type in an interface
1
2
1ML, 1ML, 1ML!
1
I haven’t used any real MLs ... I remember a talk at Yow! a few years ago where someone was approaching the same issue from the OOP side and making all modules objects, but I can’t remember the speaker or the name of the language
1
Replying to
Scala 3/Dotty has done a lot of great research into this stuff with the DOT Calculus (Dependent Object Types). Maybe that's what you were thinking of?
Scala's objects are much more complicated which requires lots of care to get right! AFAIK, I think 1ML is a bit easier thanks to being based on simpler dependent record types: people.mpi-sws.org/~rossberg/1ml/
1
no it was much more niche than that, and I think before Scala’s big wave