On Thursday, 25 January 2024 at 00:19:54 UTC, Jordan Wilson wrote:
...
That wasn't what was said. What was said was "causing US
problems". I.e. on the whole, the lack of class-level privacy
does not appear to be causing widespread problems, which
implies that it's simply lower on the list of feature requests
for most people.
Allowing mutable state to escape - the confines of the type in
which it has been declared - into the whole of the module, will
inevitably lead to a problem.
My first use of the D language demonstrated that this statement
is factual.
The more 'widespread' D is used, will 'likely' also demonstrate
the same.
Having a means to control what state can or can't escape into the
rest of the module seems like a pretty sensible option to have -
at least to me.
Again, the only argument that has been put forward against this,
is that in D you can put your type into its own module. That is,
one module for every class, and for every unittest.
That can end up to be a lot of files needing to be managed,
simply to control the escape of state into a module.
