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