About Go, D module naming

[Walter Bright]

On 12/22/2012 12:46 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Pretty much every time that this issue comes up, people are surprised by the
> fact that private symbols aren't hidden and pretty much no one wants them to
> be in overload sets.

This has been discussed before, and the same people wanted private functions 
removed from overload sets in classes.

So why does this never come up in C++ if it's such a problem? Like I said, I've 
never seen this come up on peoples' lists of what they don't like about C++, and 
it isn't because they're shy about complaining about C++ :-)