www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D - privates at module level

reply "Carlos Santander B." <carlos8294 msn.com> writes:
I don't find this behavior consistent:

-----a.d-----
private:
int x;
alias int integer;
struct A { int w; }
enum B { x,y,z }
class C { }
-----b.d-----
import a;
...
x=4;   // doesn't work
integer p;
A d;
B t;
C h;

While that assignment doesn't work, all the other declarations do. I was
under the impression that if a symbol (any symbol) was private for a module,
no other module could make use of it.

-------------------------
Carlos Santander




---

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.516 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 2003-09-01
Sep 12 2003
parent Helmut Leitner <helmut.leitner chello.at> writes:
"Carlos Santander B." wrote:
 
 I don't find this behavior consistent:
 
 -----a.d-----
 private:
 int x;
 alias int integer;
 struct A { int w; }
 enum B { x,y,z }
 class C { }
 -----b.d-----
 import a;
 ...
 x=4;   // doesn't work
 integer p;
 A d;
 B t;
 C h;
 
 While that assignment doesn't work, all the other declarations do. I was
 under the impression that if a symbol (any symbol) was private for a module,
 no other module could make use of it.

I also think there should be a more complete set of possibilities to make things visible or not. If a would defend the behaviour above, I'd say: 'private' is about encapsulation, meaning that the data of an object or module is protected against inadvertent change. The use of definitions is not risky in this sense, so it is not touched by 'private'. -- Helmut Leitner leitner hls.via.at Graz, Austria www.hls-software.com
Sep 12 2003