`restricted` member variables

[forkit]

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 15:40:35 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>
> ...
> But here, we see the whole bizarre of the current argument: if 
> I want to isolate the user of my code from having to know of 
> the implementation detail of my interface, then it logically 
> follows that they don't belong in the same module, as the 
> module is the unit of abstraction at which implementation 
> happens.
>
> The ask is fundamentally inconsistent in its motivations, and 
> this is why the only argument we have for it so far all come in 
> the form of "the holy scripture says so".

Well, programmers are users of their own code.

Other programmers are users of other programmers code.

This is true now, and it'll be true in the future.

A module should be able to handle more than one abstract data 
type.

But it can't. Because the module is THE abstract data type in D.

You cannot use a class to represent and abstract data type in D, 
unless it goes in it's own module.

How crazy is that??!!!??!!