Why do private member variables behaved like protected in the same module when creating deriving class?

[unprotected-entity]

On Monday, 29 October 2018 at 06:15:25 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> Encapsulation inside the file is rather pointless.

Say that to yourself a few times, and see if your view changes ;-)

(btw. just take a look at the length of some 'files', within 
Phobos - I mean, gee, I really hope the developer of those files 
did not share your view)

In any case, encapsulation in a file, still exists, just not so 
much for classes
- function still have it, scope braces still have it..etc..etc... 
but one of the most important constructs in programming, the 
class, does not.

> I understand the argument about accidentally bypassing 
> accessors to directly modify private members that shouldn't be 
> modified.

It's not just that it could happen 'by accident', it's that D 
actively encourages this, by making 'private' (within a module), 
a completely useless construct.

It's there by default.

Just how often does one need to access the private members of a 
class, within a module?