Re: Pacikage level access broken?

2012-04-24 Thread Timon Gehr
On 04/23/2012 07:43 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Monday, April 23, 2012 13:42:36 Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2012-04-23 10:26, Era Scarecrow wrote: On Monday, 23 April 2012 at 06:19:12 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: "public" is the default access level. So it is... That explains why the tests cam

Re: Pacikage level access broken?

2012-04-23 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On Monday, April 23, 2012 13:42:36 Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2012-04-23 10:26, Era Scarecrow wrote: > > On Monday, 23 April 2012 at 06:19:12 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > >> "public" is the default access level. > > > > So it is... That explains why the tests came out backwards on the > > results.

Re: Pacikage level access broken?

2012-04-23 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2012-04-23 10:26, Era Scarecrow wrote: On Monday, 23 April 2012 at 06:19:12 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: "public" is the default access level. So it is... That explains why the tests came out backwards on the results Wasn't it private by default in C++? I honestly don't know sometimes.

Re: Pacikage level access broken?

2012-04-23 Thread simendsjo
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 01:32:25 +0200, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Monday, April 23, 2012 01:21:21 Era Scarecrow wrote: I think I have a misunderstanding of how 'package' is suppose to work. How I understand it, you will give access to the directory, unlike private which will hide it outside o

Re: Pacikage level access broken?

2012-04-23 Thread Era Scarecrow
On Monday, 23 April 2012 at 06:19:12 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: "public" is the default access level. So it is... That explains why the tests came out backwards on the results Wasn't it private by default in C++? I honestly don't know sometimes.

Re: Pacikage level access broken?

2012-04-22 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2012-04-23 01:21, Era Scarecrow wrote: I think I have a misunderstanding of how 'package' is suppose to work. How I understand it, you will give access to the directory, unlike private which will hide it outside of the same file. This problem comes up since a struct is declared inside a packa

Re: Pacikage level access broken?

2012-04-22 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On Monday, April 23, 2012 01:21:21 Era Scarecrow wrote: > I think I have a misunderstanding of how 'package' is suppose to > work. How I understand it, you will give access to the directory, > unlike private which will hide it outside of the same file. 1. Package access is _very_ broken: http:/

Pacikage level access broken?

2012-04-22 Thread Era Scarecrow
I think I have a misunderstanding of how 'package' is suppose to work. How I understand it, you will give access to the directory, unlike private which will hide it outside of the same file. This problem comes up since a struct is declared inside a package (and even instantiated), however ac