Hi Daniel,
I didn't by no means want to say that D is unusable or unenjoyable because
of this still-persisting defect. I would say, D2 is too young to be good
rather than bad. Just.. I considered D to be more mature than it currently
is. Well, at any rate we need to wait some time.
You say:
"What's the big deal, just don't access private members (it's not like you
have to) and your code will still work when the bug is fixed.". Ok, it's
clear. But thinking in this way it's also fine to make all private class
members public (in C++ for example) and just not to call them from outside
the class. Nothing will be broken.
Nevertheless, thank you for your reply. I'm glad that my interest about
this issue is now satisfied.
On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 13:37:13 +0300, Daniel Gibson <metalcae...@gmail.com>
wrote:
2010/10/4 Sergey <sms...@gmail.com>:
bearophile, thanks you very much for your answer. I've heard that D has
a
very vibrant community; now I know it really :)
By now, from what I know about D I can draw a conclusion that it's a
greatly
promising language with many innovations and I would say even fantastic
features and tools (e.g., contract-based programming). But such serious
bugs
that are not fixed yet can disgust any programmer, I think. All the more
beginning programmers, like me. Probably D2 implementation is not
grown-up
enough yet to be used in projects of a real importance...
Do you really consider this bug (i.e. being able to access private
members of another module) so serious or "disgusting" that it makes D
unusable (or unenjoyable)?
What's the big deal, just don't access private members (it's not like
you have to) and your code will still work when the bug is fixed.
Cheers,
- Daniel
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
