On Sunday, 20 November 2022 at 12:23:39 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 11/20/22 00:31, [] () {} () wrote: > If anyone wants to learn more about why encapsulated types > (classes) have shown to be so useful in my many years of programming,Hm. 'private' is about access control. Encapsulation is something else.
BTW, many software developers and also wikipedia actually agree with [] () {} (): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encapsulation_(computer_programming)
And this all is getting really silly. The proof is in the pudding. I mean the existence of really large successful software is the best evidence of the programming language or coding technique superiority. C++ has plenty of large successful object oriented software written using it (Mozilla, Chromium, LibreOffice, Qt, LLVM, ...). People had a lot of time to try various C++ features and everyone has their own opinion. Multiple inheritance isn't very popular, but having private class members and the ability to easily hide class implementation details is generally seen as a good and useful feature.
D makes a rather arbitrary change to encapsulation and claims that this is an improvement. But you can't easily convince everyone by just making such claims. How it really works in practice is the only thing that matters.
