Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Sunday, December 23, 2012 16:11:02 Walter Bright wrote: >> 6. I'd also throw in getting rid of the "protected" access attribute >> completely, as I've seen debate over that being a useless idea > > Really? I'm shocked at that. It's necessary for stuff like NVI if > private functions aren't virtual as well as any other case where you > need to override internal functionality in derived classes. > >> 7. there's also some debate about what "package" should mean >> >> I.e. it should be a fairly comprehensive design addressing access, >> not just one aspect of it. > > Sounds like a good idea. >
With "acceptable losses" of course? (No I don't have anything better to do)