`restricted` member variables

[The Zealot]

On Thursday, 23 June 2022 at 11:04:40 UTC, forkit wrote:
> On Thursday, 23 June 2022 at 10:50:26 UTC, Alexandru Ermicioi 
> wrote:
>> On Thursday, 23 June 2022 at 10:36:02 UTC, forkit wrote:
>>> But it is an elehpant, not a mosquito.
>>
>>> That's the point I've been trying to make - which it seems, 
>>> is still not getting across to some.
>>
>> Well then you failed in your task. Perhaps changing the 
>> approach would help here.
>>
>
> Well, my task, was to highlight this issue in D, and stop it 
> from always being stuffed under the rug by the 'opposers'.
>
> Thanks to dkorpel, for 'volunteering' his time and effort, to 
> really move this forward (not as a new language feature, but as 
> something you can try out, if you want).
>
> So I'd say, the straedgy worked, just fine ;-)
>
> Making 'noise' was, sadly, the only way to get any movement on 
> this.
>
> A DIP, at this point, would have resulted in absolutely nothing 
> occuring. (probably why so many were encouraging me to take 
> that path instead).
>
> If anyone needs me, I'll be playing with 'private(this)' in 
> dkorpel's branch of dmd.

So instead of just implementing it yourself, you had others do 
your work, and now you won't even go and write the DIP you were 
gathering opinions for. Good job....