On Monday, 6 October 2014 at 15:44:36 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Monday, 6 October 2014 at 12:36:41 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 11:54:55 +0000
John Colvin via Digitalmars-d-learn
<digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com>
wrote:
I disagree. It's simple and easy to understand.
and hackish.
D is very amenable to slightly hackish code.
This is the only genuine problem I can see that requires a
language extension. Separating class definition from method
definition in to different compilation units doesn't allow
access to private members without very nasty hacks.
no hacks needed.
I meant that without a language change, one does need hacks.
So, you admit it is a hack! Gotcha!
