Left field idea: rename types to `T` and drop exposing about compiler

[Janiczek]

From a first read, my absolutely first reaction is that I like

import Elm.Data.ModuleName {- as ModuleName -} exposing (ModuleName)

stuff : ModuleName

more than

import Elm.Data.ModuleName

stuff : Elm.Data.ModuleName.T

or even

import Elm.Data.ModuleName as ModuleName

stuff : ModuleName.T

I'll mull this over a bit, maybe it'll grow on me 🙂

Do you think there are advantages to this? Is it pain in the neck to do import Elm.Data.Foo as Foo exposing (Foo)? What's the motivation?

[harrysarson]

From a first read, my absolutely first reaction is that I like ... more than .. or even

Thinking about this some more I do have to agree with you. I think the gist of my issue is that I see something like

func : String -> ModuleName -> Exposing -> Module

and have to scroll all the way up to the top of the current elm file to find the file that defines of each type. Whereas with

func : String -> Elm.Data.ModuleName.T -> Elm.Data.Exposing.T -> Elm.Data.Module.T

I know instantly where to look.

[harrysarson]

Closing, I think cons > pros here.