2.0 suggestion: fix the clash between `Future` and `Distributed.Future`
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 49.1k
- Forks
- 6k
- Avg merge
- 2d 2h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 209
Description
I wonder if, in Julia 2.0, it would be possible to make exactly one of the following breaking changes:
- Rename the
Futurestdlib to something else (e.g.FutureBehavior) - Rename the
Distributed.Futurestruct to something else (e.g.RemoteFutureorFutureComputation) - Stop exporting
Distributed.FuturefromDistributed
Motivation
julia> using Distributed
julia> Future
Future
julia> import Future
ERROR: importing Future into Main conflicts with an existing identifier
In fact, it is now impossible to load the Future standard library.
To me, it seems bad that it is this easy to "break" the importing of a standard library. If these were packages, I don't think it would be a problem. But I feel like standard libraries shouldn't clash with each other in such obvious ways.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reproducing the shown using Distributed, Future, and import Future commands in Julia. Investigate how Future is exported by Distributed and loaded as a standard library, then determine which of the three proposed breaking changes is acceptable; done means the standard library can be loaded without the demonstrated name conflict.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- julia
- Domain
- developer-experience
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100