Fix #2529: explicit protection package #3651
Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce at puremagic.com
Wed Aug 20 07:25:58 PDT 2014
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 13:05:54 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> Your proposal makes such module layout illegal:
>
> std.package1.module1
> std.package1.module2
> std.package1.subpackage.module1
> std.package1.subpackage.module2
>
> (can't have symbols in subpackage that are also available to
> package1 but not whole std / public, must have
> `subpackage_module1` instead, `package_1_subpackage_module1` if
> it must be available for whole std)
If some utility is internal to std.package1 an used in the entire
std.package1, shouldn't it sit in std.package1? Why push it to
subpackage?
std.package1.module1
std.package1.module2
std.package1.internal <- package1's internals go here
std.package1.subpackage.module1
std.package1.subpackage.module2
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list