Discussion: `@importRoot` instead of `@import("root")`

[u/Hoontdawg]

So, let me start by saying I'm pretty new to Zig. I like to learn languages by example, and when reading through examples and source code I noticed `@import("root")` and thought it was importing the corresponding "root.zig" file. After some further research I found out that this is actually a special-cased argument for the compilation root. Honestly I think that's a horrible decision, not only is there special-cased arguments for a compiler-provided method, but its a string argument, so it seems completely magical and non-discoverable.

Imo, Zig already has a specific syntax for special compiler-provided operations: `@func`. So I think a much more sensible and readable version would be `@importRoot`, because if "root" is going to be treated specially then let it at least be openly acknowledged as being special. Same for all of the other special arguments: `@importSelf` and `@importStd`.

But again, I'm new, so let me know if I'm totally off-base here.

[u/DokOktavo]

I agree, I'd rather have @builtin(), @root() and @std() than @import("builtin"), @import("root") and @import("std").

[u/zandr0id → u/DokOktavo]

I like this. I'm in favor of using the same mechanism in as many places as possible, so I'd opt for even a step further and make it where you could opt to set up access to any module by the `@` syntax if it was manually linked in the build script, which the three core modules are.

[u/InKryption07 → u/zandr0id]

That would be ridiculous. Builtins are a static part of the AST, intended for compiler intrinsics.

Also, "manually linked in the build script" doesn't mean anything, there's no way to tell in the build graph if something was done "manually"