Time to destroy Walter: breaking modules into packages

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Thursday, June 20, 2013 00:21:45 TommiT wrote:
> Also, I'm just curious why do you keep saying "we don't want to
> complicate the package access specifier any further"? Because
> isn't the current specification of the package access specifier
> the simplest possible that it could ever be? "Everything under
> the same folder has access to symbols labeled package". It takes
> just 11 words to define it. You're talking about it like it's
> already somehow complicated.

No, it's not complicated, but the lanugage as a whole is complicated, and any 
new feature that's added to it increases its complexity. As such, it needs to 
pull its weight, and I really don't believe that that's the case here. I just 
don't think that complicating the package access modifier any further is worth 
the gain. There is some gain, but I think that it's ultimately quite small, 
and I'd much prefer that access modifiers stay simple. Obviously, you're 
entitled to think that the extra complexity is worth it, but I don't agree.

- Jonathan M Davis