http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2538
[email protected] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] ------- Comment #5 from [email protected] 2009-01-20 12:42 ------- See issue 2524 comment 8. However, this brings us back to the problem of inheritance protection, previously brought up in issue 177 and issue 2563. We already have why it doesn't make sense for classes in D; it doesn't make sense for interfaces for a different reason. The point of private inheritance is to implement an "implemented in terms of" relationship, but interfaces contain no implementation. So the "implementing" class would gain nothing over not implementing the interface at all. I think the same would apply to protected inheritance.... --
