🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5143@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes:

   Recently, I proposed the introduction of a Pascal style `with' statement.
   Thinking more about it, I now realize that it would probably be better to
   have something more like an Ada `use' statement to solve this problem.
   An Ada `use' statement looks just like `use <module>;' (where <module>
   is just an identifier for some module). ... If you `use' two or
   more modules within
   the same scope, and if those modules contain identically named declarations
   for different things, then in order to refer (unambigously) to any of the
   things with the (conflicting) name, you must use the full and explicit
   qualification.

The Common Lisp package system has a similar scheme; in fact, there
is a function called USE-PACKAGE which does (effectively) what ADA use
does, except that the CL package system is really something that works
at READ (parse) time on symbols, not at compile time on semantic
units.

I'm not sure if ``overloading'' class is a good way to introduce such
a feature; adding new keywords would be justified in this case.