We need an internal keyword.

[12345swordy]

On Sunday, 21 October 2018 at 21:48:22 UTC, Laurent Tréguier 
wrote:
> On Sunday, 21 October 2018 at 17:09:05 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>> [...]
>
> It's not "my" solution. It's D's solution. I perfectly 
> understand why you'd want this and I would probably make use of 
> a private/internal difference myself if it was available.
>
> If you already know about this solution however, I don't even 
> know why you're starting this thread; since changing the 
> behavior of private would be a major language change breaking 
> tons of existing codebases, plus it would require adding yet 
> another keyword.
>
> Given that this conversation has happened before and things 
> haven't changed, I'm very doubtful that it could happen at any 
> point in time, sadly.

If the cost out way the benefits then I simply introduce the 
"strict" keyword to avoid code breakage, or introduce the 
optional module scoping.

-Alex