Why do private member variables behaved like protected in the same module when creating deriving class?

[12345swordy]

On Friday, 26 October 2018 at 22:00:21 UTC, Stanislav Blinov 
wrote:
> On Friday, 26 October 2018 at 21:16:54 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>> [...]
>
>> [...]
>
> I'm not the guy who stomped in here demanding answers from a 
> language author regarding false assumptions.

"who stomped in here". That is your imagination.
>>> [...]
>
>> [...]

> "protected" exists solely for classes, not modules.
It like you not even trying to understand what I am saying here.
>> [...]
>
> The word is "access", not "inherit".
I know what I meant when I use the word "inherit". Don't play coy 
with me.
> But indeed, if you want child to have access to parent's state 
> inaccessible to external code, you should use 'protected'. 
> That's exactly how you can allow other people to access some of 
> the sate even when they're inheriting in another module.

*sigh*
>
>> [...]
>
> It feels like you don't understand how inheritance works. A 
> derived class *does* inherit *all* of the parent's guts 
> irrespective of where they're defined relative to each other, 
> or what visibility attributes they have. It's just that some of 
> the guts may not be accessible to the derived class. Parent's 
> private state doesn't magically disappear from the derived 
> class' bits.
>
>> [...]
>
> How so?
What does "use the language as intended" mean anyway?

>> [...]
>
> This *is* about encapsulation, which in itself is about 
> visibility. "private" is strong encapsulation, "public" is weak 
> encapsulation, "protected" is the middle ground. But a unit of 
> encapsulation in D is a module, not a class.

You are addressing a straw man still.
>> [...]
>
> Eh?
>
>>> [...]
>
>> [...]
>
> No. I'm explaining to you that your understanding of the spec 
> is incorrect.
>
Or poor reading compensation.
>> [...]
>
> What was it that you said about strawmen?
You literally use the words "artificial restrictions"!
>
>> [...]
>
> "private" doesn't get rid of anything. It simply disallows 
> access outside of module. At least in D that's what it does. 
> Again, perhaps there's something wrong with your understanding 
> of inheritance.


>> [...]

> Which is why you should've thought twice before demanding 
> answers.

No, that is you failing to follow the conversation. I am done.