On Tuesday, 4 June 2013 at 18:33:21 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
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.
"package" may become quite useful once we have better package. It
allows to have some local "utility" module used by specific
package but not generic enough in global so that it won't cause
name collision (after DIP22 is implemented, of course).
