Non-ugly ways to implement a 'static' class or namespace?

ProtectAndHide ProtectAndHide at
Fri Feb 10 21:52:02 UTC 2023

On Friday, 10 February 2023 at 14:50:59 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
> On Friday, 10 February 2023 at 07:04:31 UTC, Max Samukha wrote:
>> Having class-private doesn't preclude module-private. Dennis 
>> even submitted a PR implementing class-private, but it stalled 
>> because people couldn't agree on whether class-private should 
>> be "private to class" or "private to class instance".
> This is a great example of the problem. In a discussion of any 
> five programmers, you'll have five conflicting sets of rules 
> that are the obvious and intuitive way to do it.

Well in Swift, there is no problem .. at all.

Why is it a problem in D then? (and I mean technically).

I think the 'real' problem, is that some core D people just 
refuse to allow D to provide such an option to the programmer. 
For what reason, I cannot fathom, since Swift can do this just 
fine. I think it's some kind of bias against a particular style 
of programming that some don't want to see occuring when people 
use the D programming lanuguage. i.e. It has nothing at all to do 
with implementation, since it's already been demonstrated that it 
can be implemented, very easily.

Again, in this particular area, Swift is way ahead of D.

More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn mailing list