Extending D's support for object-oriented design with private(this)

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Wednesday, April 24, 2024 11:53:18 PM MDT Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole 
via dip.ideas wrote:
> Apart from literature review type content, there isn't much to discuss
> here. There is nothing to tune.
>
> I suggest you start work on a draft DIP and move to development unless
> Walter or Atila have strong opinions against it.

Well, Walter has consistently shot down requests for this kind of feature in
the past (and there was a discussion in the newsgroup within just the past
couple of months where it came up IIRC, and Walter shot it down then), so
unless someone can come up with a really compelling reason why it's needed,
it's going to be shot down. Unless something has changed quite recently,
Walter's opinion on this has already been made quite clear, and it's been
the same for years.

The normal answer is that if you really need the other code in the module to
not have access to the class' members, then that class should just go in
another module. In practice, the current situation rarely causes problems.
It seems more to be something that annoys some folks on principle rather
than being an actual technical issue. I would be shocked if this DIP went
anywhere.

- Jonathan M Davis