Le 02/04/2012 22:59, Simen Kjærås a écrit :
On Mon, 02 Apr 2012 20:02:20 +0200, deadalnix <deadal...@gmail.com> wrote:
Now, there are a number of people very unhappy about this state of
affairs and
want private to hide symbols as well (personally, I think that the
fact that
it makes private aliases effectively useless is reason enough to
seriously
reconsider the current behavior), but I don't know if there's any
real chance
of convincing Walter or not.
This would be a huge mistake. For instance, private method are
sometime meant to be overridden in subclasses, which is impossible if
symbol is inaccessible.
NVI for instance would be impossible in such a situation.
NVI is perfectly possible with protected.
You'll loose the ability to define a function, without being able to
call it.
It is something you want if function have to be called by pair for
example (using protected here would introduce temporal coupling). It
make even more sense if you consider combining it with contract programing.
