On Tuesday, 15 May 2018 at 00:28:42 UTC, KingJoffrey wrote:
On Monday, 14 May 2018 at 19:40:18 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
A slippery slope fallacy isn't helping your case. Write a DIP
if it bothers you so much, as it changes the languages
fundamentally.
Alexander
If 'getting a module to respect the enscapsulation boundaries
the programmer puts in place would change the language so
'fundamentally', then the language 'already' presents big
problems for large complex application development.
Evidence for this claim please.
But C++/Java/C# users all expect private to mean private,
We expect that users C++/Java/C# to know that D is not
C++/Java/C# and to read the specification.
Again write a DIP if this bothers you. You are not going to make
any language changes by ranting about it on the forums.
