Module-level accessibility

[Denis Koroskin]

On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 22:13:52 +0400, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com>  
wrote:

> On Monday, October 04, 2010 10:37:53 Sean Kelly wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
>> > There is still debate on the matter of private methods in interfaces.
>> > Please bring up in this forum any additional pro and con arguments  
>> that
>> > you might have.
>>
>> What debate?  Private methods don't get a vtbl entry so I don't see how  
>> an
>> interface could possibly require one, regardless of in-module  
>> visibility.
>
> Except that per TDPL private methods are _supposed_ to be in the vtable:
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4542
>
> The fact that they don't currently is definitely limiting. Personally, I  
> liked
> what TDPL said about interfaces and private methods, and I don't know  
> what the
> debate against them is. It all seemed quite sensible to me.
>
> Regardless, however, private methods really should be properly  
> polymorphic.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Interesting enough, you can "override" private methods, yet the override  
keyword is silently ignored:

import std.stdio;

class A
{
	private void foo()
	{
		writeln("A.foo");
	}
	
	void test()
	{
		foo();
	}
}

class B : A
{
	private override void foo()
	{
		writeln("B.foo");
	}
}

void main()
{
	B b = new B();
	b.test();
}

# dmd private.d && ./private
A.foo