Protected package?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On 10/25/18 3:53 PM, 12345swordy wrote:
> On Thursday, 25 October 2018 at 19:48:43 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On 10/25/18 12:45 PM, 12345swordy wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 24 October 2018 at 23:36:56 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>>>> It says here that:
>>>> "package extends private so that package members can be accessed 
>>>> from code in other modules that are in the same package. If no 
>>>> identifier is provided, this applies to the innermost package only, 
>>>> or defaults to private if a module is not nested in a package."
>>>>
>>>> Can this be extended to the protected visibility attribute?
>>>> If not, then does it need an DIP to do so?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well I don't think there no harm of doing so.
>>
>> Sorry, I'm not sure what the question is.
>>
>> What is "this" and how is it being extended to protected?
>>
>> FYI, I didn't know that you could package something to a specific 
>> identifier, interesting.
>>
> 
> The package visibility attribute. It is an extension of private, which 
> means that it is not inheritable.

I think what you are asking is for a "package protected" attribute that 
acts like protected, but ONLY for modules inside the given package, right?

You would need new syntax for this, for sure. So I think a DIP might be 
required. There is a problem with having package protected be something 
different, because right now a visibility attribute overrides, not adds 
to, an existing attribute.

-Steve