About Go, D module naming

Han needtoknow at basis.only.net
Mon Dec 24 01:44:30 PST 2012


Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Sunday, December 23, 2012 16:11:02 Walter Bright wrote:
>> 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
>
> Really? I'm shocked at that. It's necessary for stuff like NVI if
> private functions aren't virtual as well as any other case where you
> need to override internal functionality in derived classes.
>
>> 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.
>
> Sounds like a good idea.
>


With "acceptable  losses" of course?

(No I don't have anything better to do) 




More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list