I'd be perfectly happy to have it take a block.

-- Yehuda

2009/2/19 Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter / sun.com>

> Yehuda Katz wrote:
>
>> I would be open to making it take a block, but I'm not aware of any
>> use-case where that would be helpful, so I left it out at the beginning to
>> reduce the need for extra ceremony.
>>
> ...
>
>> Again, I'm open to doing it a different way. I chose this initially
>> because it makes it easier to implement at parse-time (which is required for
>> performance) and because I can't think of any use-case where more granular
>> application of namespaces would actually be useful, but I'd be fine with
>> "use" taking a block if it moved the proposal forward.
>>
>
> I suppose there's another argument in favor of an explicit bounding of the
> "use" area: where do you *start*? If this is parse time, having it start at
> the first "use" call seems a little odd; you'd almost want it to be a
> whole-file pragma. But starting it at the beginning of the file seems just
> as odd, since a use anywhere in the body changes all method dispatches.
>
> - Charlie
>
>


-- 
Yehuda Katz
Developer | Engine Yard
(ph) 718.877.1325