DIP22 : Private symbol visibility

[deadalnix]

On Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 14:50:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Monday, January 28, 2013 18:05:37 Dicebot wrote:
>> http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP22
>> 
>> There are two important issues with current protection 
>> attribute
>> design:
>> 
>> * Senseless name clashes between private and public symbols
>> * No way to specify internal linkage storage class
>> 
>> This DIP addresses both of them with two decoupled proposals:
>> 
>> * Change of private related name resolution rules
>> * Definition of static storage class for module-scope symbols.
>
> I see no point to the internal linkage stuff. What we need is 
> for inaccessible
> symbols to not be put in overload sets. I'm not sure that it 
> really needs to
> be any more complicated than that.
>

exported symbol cannot be optimized as much, as the compiler 
isn't aware of all calls. GCC people made some measurement about 
that and it ends up being significant.