On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 14:25:59 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
If some utility is internal to std.package1 an used in the
entire std.package1, shouldn't it sit in std.package1? Why push
it to subpackage?
std.package1.internal <- package1's internals go here
It may semantically belong to subpackage but still needs to be
available to package1, something not uncommon in templated code
(subpackage is generic implementation, package1 is specialization
that still needs access to non-public functions).
Also you seem to imply that "internal" is always small tightly
coupled module which is hardly true for any higher level
functionality. So in practice it will be more like this:
Not really encouraging..
What you propose is effectively prohibiting to use packages to
organize your code and requiring to design your module hierarchy
based on desired protection relations, not other way around. I
think it is conceptually wrong approach and unnecessarily
restrictive compared to overall D design principles (no single
"true" way of doing things)