On Monday, 30 October 2017 at 23:03:12 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Yeah, the whole "private is module-private, not aggregate-private" throws a monkey wrench into the works. I can understand the logic behind module-private vs. aggregate-private, but sometimes you really *do* want aggregate-private, but D doesn't let you express that except via splitting things up into submodules, which is a lot of overhead for minor payback.
Have you ever heard of the difference in how private works in D vs. C++ ever causing any problems when calling D code from C++, or vice-versa?
I imagine if there is an issue with calling C++ code from D, you can do what you say wrt submodules, but I'm not sure it really matters or not.
