Proposed improvements to the separate compilation model

[Kagamin]

Kagamin Wrote:

> Walter Bright Wrote:
> 
> > The only way the linker can detect mismatches is by embedding the hash into the 
> > name, i.e. more name mangling.
> 
> It's not the only way. You can keep current mangling scheme and store hashes in another place. If the linker doesn't support hashes, everything will just work, if it does, it can provide extra safety for this particular scenario.

Anyways, is it a good idea to force dependency of client on the fields of a class. Fields are implementation details and should not affect client code. This means we end up with plain old interfaces we already have up and working.