Make clear the " alias, require, and import " also talks about use

[PragTob]

Browsing the docs I found the page and found it weird that it didn't mention use (as the 4 of them go together), reading the page I realized that it does mention use but it's just not mentioned in the headline so this seemed like an easy fix.

I did not modify the file name, although I think it'd be better to also rename the file (and references to it). However, I was worried about breaking outside links to https://hexdocs.pm/elixir/alias-require-and-import.html I'm looking for guidance on:

• is the breakage ok
• should we just not break
• should we break and maybe leave a note in the existing file that documenation moved (and hide from the getting started)

Thanks for all your work as usual! 💚

[josevalim]

Hi @PragTob! I am not actually sure about this change. In a way, I understand that for most Elixir developers they are at the same level, but the first three are really language features while use is a convention. So I think the current title highlights well their relationship. I am open to hearing more thoughts. :) (but yeah, we should not change the filename!)

[PragTob]

👋

As usual I suspected that there was some reasoning I wasn't privy to and not just an oversight 😅

My reasoning was just that what I was looking for was a comparison of the 4 (to double check my understanding before writing on it, and to link to more extensive docs) and I almost didn't read the page/was going to look for more as it didn't mention use. I scrolled down to see if the "next" chapter maybe covered use and was pleasantly surprised that the chapter did cover use.

In the body it's also covered on the same level as alias, require and import and no real distinction is made there. That's why it seemed like an oversight to me and well mostly I didn't expect it's docs there due to the title.

I'm also interested in the PoV of it being a convention - since to my eyes (not a language designer/core contributor) use is very much part of the language. I guess what you mean is you could also just call another macro in the body and so it's not necessary per se which I'd get :)

Anyhow, that's why I thought it'd be worthwhile. As always, up to you! 🙇 💚

[v0idpwn]

Maybe it's a good idea to split use into its own page. It feels a bit out of place there.

[PragTob]

I'd definitely expect it there as it's the 4 ways we... I dunno... reference other modules usually at the top of our module. Imo esp. beginners wonder about when to use which one (I know I did, and lots of people I taught did to) so having them all in one page highlighting their differences totally makes sense to me :)

[josevalim]

💚 💙 💜 💛 ❤️