On 2011-08-08 09:11, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday 08 August 2011 08:55:22 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Or because neither of the modules are in package they are perhaps in an
implicit global package making "package" in this case behave as public.
Except that I don't think that sub-packages have access to the package
functions in their parent packages, and if that's true, then it's not the same
as public. However, if they _do_ have access to their parent packages' package
functions, then it _is_ the same as public. I don't think that they do though.
But of course, I could be wrong about that.
- Jonathan M Davis
No, sub-packages don't have access to the parent package. Hence the "in
this case". I guess I wasn't very clear.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
