Using closure in function scope to make "real" private class members

[forkit]

On Thursday, 9 June 2022 at 01:54:22 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
>
> You've said enough about this topic in this thread and others 
> that you could have written a DIP by now. And both of us are 
> repeating the same points over and over, so I'm done with it.

In Australian politics, you don't bring a measure to the floor, 
unless you already have good insight into how that measure will 
be accepted, or not.

I'd take the same approach with a DIP.

i.e first ascertain what level of support there might be.

If the indication is very little support, don't bother bring the 
measure to the floor - cause you already know it's going nowhere.

Clearly there is so little support for this simple idea, that 
it's pointless discussing any further.

Good luck in the contstant explaining to new comers, as to why 
private doesn't really mean private, and why you have to do 
various workarounds to simulate it, and why the compiler will 
never (can never) enforce those decisions, and why D will not 
even consider an option to let the designer make the decision.

You'll need to provide better arguments though. Cause you're 
current arguments are not persuasive enough, IMO, to quickly 
shutdown the discussion of this issue, when it inevitably arises 
again.