Private symbol (in)visibility within a module

[NotYouAgain]

On Sunday, 5 May 2024 at 07:26:36 UTC, NotYouAgain wrote:
> ..

btw. As for the rationale, I'll take a quote from Jonathan, but 
apply it towards my idea (to which his quote was not intended, 
but fits perfectly).

"I don't see _any_ benefit in having inaccessible functions be in 
overload sets. It's leaking implementation details outside of the 
scope that they're in and breaking code elsewhere when changes 
are made. What do you think is so desirable about having 
inaccessible functions in overload sets?"

https://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.2919.1356161036.5162.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com

I know he'll argue (rightly) that I've quoted him out of context, 
and I certainly have. But the rationale he gave is exactly the 
same rationale I'm giving. The only difference? I'm applying it 
classes/structs just as C#, C++, Java, Swift, and many more... 
already do.