Change "use" to "extern mod"

[andrew-d]

Hello,

I was recently reading about the 0.2 release of Rust, and it looks really interesting! One thing that bugged me that I wanted to bring up - I'm not a fan of the "crust" keyword. The word "crust" has an intrinsic meaning in English, and my brain insists on reading it incorrectly at first read. I'd like to suggest changing it to "externc", which mimics C's extern "C", and also doesn't have any other intrinsic meaning.

Thanks!

[graydon]

We're likely to take the word extern to stand in for native in the current module-declaration scheme. But I agree that these two matters ought to be unified. Here's my suggestion:

• Differentiate declarations and definitions. For both consts and fns. See Allow referencing non-function symbols in native modules #1071
• An extern module is one that is full of declarations only.
• A declaration is only legal when qualified with extern explicitly, or implicitly within an extern module.
• A definition might be extern as well. If so, it's equivalent to today's crust fn types. That is: by placing extern on a definition you're saying you want to make that definition visible-and-usable to external language/linkage rules.
• We define a default interpretation of the ABI-and-language-rules-you-mean when you say extern, and permit overriding that by attributes rather than fixed strings. The default is C and cdecl or something.

[graydon]

I've upgraded this to RFC an edited the title. Hope that's ok with the original reporter.

[andrew-d]

@graydon: Fine with me :-)

[brson]

All those suggestions sound reasonable to me. In particular I would prefer to be able to declare externs outside of native mods (or get rid of native mods completely)

[brson]

I do think I would prefer to just get rid of native mods. Perhaps the ABI and whatever options can be associated with the current scope, so a native mod would just be a mod tagged with the requested ABI and filled with externs.

[nikomatsakis]

I like it, although it seems like an extern prototype and an extern declaration are basically overloaded uses of the same keyword. But I guess that's ok. And extern is certainly better than crust.

[graydon]

Re: getting rid of naive mods, I thought about this but thought maybe having the symbols scoped to a module is useful since it gives you an item to hang the library name off of. Maybe that doesn't matter as much as I think, though.

(also saves you writing extern over and over)

[pcwalton]

Could we just have extern blocks like C++ and allow people to hang the library name off any module, not just native ones? That'd eliminate the complexity of native mod while still keeping the programmer-convenience aspect.

[jsternberg]

@nikomatsakis I like @graydon's suggestion. It seemed like an overloaded use of the word "extern", but if you view the word "extern" as just "uses the C ABI", then I think it makes more sense. To call into rust from C, you need to declare the function as using the C ABI using extern. To call into C from rust, you need to do the same thing.

[graydon]

@pcwalton I suppose we could do that, yes. In general we haven't any support for item-qualifier blocks yet (eg. extern blocks, pub / priv blocks, unsafe blocks for globals as in #553) but I'm not opposed to that approach. It'll take a bit of legwork, is all.

Library names on arbitrary modules will probably come to pass as part of #2176, though I am not sure. Lots of interdependencies in this cluster of bugs, sadly.

[graydon]

Thinking about this more, here's the organization I propose (also in light of @pcwalton's renaming-modules thing required for the rewrite of resolve in #1935, and @brson's suggestion that we squish .rs and .rc files together in #2176):

• use std becomes extern mod std;
• use std (k=v, a=b); becomes extern mod std = (k=v, a=b);
• native mod foo { ... } becomes extern mod foo { ... }
• crust fn foo(...) { ... } becomes extern fn foo(...) { ... }
• mod std = path::to::other is used to alias mods in a crate.
• mod std = "path/in/filesystem" is used to compile-in other mods, as in crate files.
• mod std; is equal to mod std = "std"; as in crate files.
• import foo becomes use foo
• export foo becomes pub foo ... on the item
• ABIs, link-args on the current crate, etc. all remain in attrs

That is: we lose the keywords use, native and crust, import and export. We express most stuff through extern.

The first step in making this is just to make extern work for crust and native presently.

[graydon]

First step on this landed in 697f1e3. extern is now recognized where native and crust were. Need a snapshot to purge the remainder. All uses of "native" nomenclature in the compiler have changed to "foreign" to distinguish from other sorts of extern.

(I hope this doesn't wind up too ambiguous when hacking on the compiler. I think losing the extra keywords is the right thing. Hope!)

[nikomatsakis]

+1 for extern mod in place of use. That's clever.

[z0w0]

I'm also loving the idea of extern mod, because it makes it easier to get rid of cargo and unify it with the single rust tool idea. That way, it could potentially lead to a URL rather than a file path. e.g. extern mod sdl = "git://github.com/brson/rust-sdl.git/sdl.rs"; or extern mod sdl = "http://libsdl.org/rustpkg.tar.gz/sdl.rs";.

[pcwalton]

Updated title (was "RFC: Change 'crust' to 'extern'") to reflect the work that remains on this bug.

[pcwalton]

This works now. Snapshot needed to remove old syntax.

[brson]

I think we can call this done, though there's still some cleanup work left and we may yet change extern mod to something else. Will open another issue for purging export