On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:10:32 -0400, Max Samukha <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 June 2013 at 17:39:05 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP22
"I'd also throw in getting rid of the "protected" access attribute
completely, as I've seen debate over that being a useless idea"
How is that useless? Any non-trivial OOP code
(http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.8/qabstractitemview.html#protected-functions)
swarm with protected methods, and rightfully so. How would one restrict
access to members that are not part of public interface but should be
accessible to the derived classes?
Looking at the original comment here:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/[email protected]
It looks like Jonathan raised the same point, but Walter never answered.
Since protected access is actually ESSENTIAL in OOP (at least, some form
of virtual non-public function access, private is not virtual, so it would
be disastrous to remove protected), I am wondering whether Walter really
meant "package", as that has very little utility.
Care to answer, Walter?
-Steve
