About Go, D module naming

[Han]

Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/23/2012 4:03 AM, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
>> Because C++ *can* hide symbols from other modules with the
>> anonymous namespace. D has no equivalent.
>
> Everyone here has raised some good points. But this isn't a simple
> issue, so I suggest getting together and preparing a DIP. A DIP
> should address:
> 1. what access means at module scope

No no. What is persecutiion?

> 2. at class scope

What is "class"?Nuf said, ask bred beauty   of Trump lineage. I hate her. I 
don't hate her. I do hate though, mind you.  what what?  time out

apparently I need money, lots of it, to engange  pretty women.

oh shut the fuck upp........... I   cannot be  someone I love as much as 
.... I get to type?

Now THIS is an aberration...

I am   afflicted
what is


I musst have fell down or something  last month.. maybe I was typin hee 
and dib;t iy  iwe ne biw


  ii
> 3. at template mixin scope
> 4. backwards compatibility
> 5. overloading at each scope level and the interactions with access
> 6. I'd also throw in getting rid of the "protected" access attribute
> completely, as I've seen debate over that being a useless idea
> 7. there's also some debate about what "package" should mean
>
> I.e. it should be a fairly comprehensive design addressing access,
> not just one aspect of it.