Module visibility feature?

[Jeremy DeHaan]

On Wednesday, 17 July 2013 at 11:38:32 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Jeremy DeHaan:
>
>> package module foo.barstuff;
>
> Or this?
>
> private module foo.barstuff;
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

In some sense, I feel like package, private, or protected would 
all work semantically. I only used package because I was trying 
to keep things consistent with how that attribute works normally.

However it is implemented, I just think having some kind of 
module visibility attribute(s) would be a nice feature.