Private visible?

[Dave]

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> Dave wrote:
> 
>> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>>  > Lucas Goss wrote:
>>  >
>>  >> Was there ever any resolve as to private being visible? I know Walter
>>  >> said he saw the value of private by default, but what about private
>>  >> being visible? It just seems to have dropped off the radar and I don't
>>  >> know if thats good or bad.
>>  >>
>>  >> Lucas
>>  >
>>  > Did you mean accessible? Anyway, see Bruno's post, although I'm quite
>> sure
>>  > it won't be forgotten by some of us ;)
>>  >
>>
>> Here's my take - feel free to correct:
>>
>> - accessible: the symbol can be used (accessed). Must be visible as well
>> for the lookup (I realize this is obvious).
> 
> Yes, that would be the sane thing, but one of the privacy problems in D, is
> that it has been possible to access symbols by using the FQN, even though
> it really isn't visible (declared to be private). As it is, I see no reason
> to differ between visible and accessible, IMO they're two sides of the same
> coin, or should be.
> 

See: http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?digitalmars.D/39754