Re: Better way to require with shorthands/renamed symbols

[Stefan Kangas]

João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com> writes:

> [...] Maybe we can somehoe have file-local
> variables in other points of the file?
>
> Would that suffice for you and Stefan now?

Sure, if we can figure out how to do that in a clean way.  Otherwise, we
are probably better off just leaving things as they are, rather than
complicating things just for the sake of it.  Maybe it's already fine as
it is, given the scope of the feature.

I guess most files will not use this, so it should okay if those that
do just add a note "see below" to their requires section.