I'm not sure I agree with this generalization. Having more first-class constructs means that—unless they're truly orthogonal—language designers and users both have to deal with the interactions between them. Implementing new constructs by composing existing ones is far superior. https://twitter.com/jdegoes/status/1091678739589545985 …
Oh, I wasn't proposing that. There would still need to be a way to do separate compilation, with the same "object" or "package" still potentially split across several files. But its entire contents would be statically known.
-
-
I think that's pretty much the case already in some popular module systems like Java's.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I guess it boils down to: - "closed" modules: content of the module "Foo" is the code between the curly braces in "module Foo { ... }" - "open" modules: content of the module "foo" is the code in files in the directory "foo" compiled within a single compilation unit
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.