About Go, D module naming

[Han]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 12/22/12 3:21 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> It's that way in C++ mainly so that it doesn't make the already
>> complex overloading system even more so. And in 25 years of working
>> with C++, I've never seen this make anyone's list of horrible things
>> about C++.
>
> I think this is a fallacious argument because it concludes that apples
> should be peeled because oranges should. The impossibility to define a
> symbol really private in D will lead to awkward idioms like prefixing
> every private symbol with _p_ or something.
>
>
Who cares what you think?