• Georg Wrede (13/21) Apr 02 2005 What's wrong here?
• Mike Parker (11/12) Apr 02 2005 I don't see why. 'package protection' is the phrase commonly used in the...
• Kevin VR (6/21) Apr 02 2005 To me it sounds more logical to call it "packaged" in stead of
• Walter (3/6) Apr 03 2005 We could always call it 'static' .

Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:

Oh oh!

The followin hit me:

 Reading this I am trying to implement following:

 There are two modules
 --------------------
 module foo;

 class Foo {
     package int dummy;
 }

 --------------------

What's wrong here?

Skimming real fast, I momentarily thought there is a package somewhere, 
called dummy.

Of course, if one knows the language, then it is obvious it is a 
protection attribute for this int variable called dummy.

----

Got me thinking. If "package" is ok, then why don't we have "class", 
"file", "module", "program", "dll"..... protection attributes?

So the word "package" is unsymmetric. Should we rename it?

Would the word "package" be better reserved for later use, possibly 
similar to the word "module"?

Mike Parker <aldacron71 yahoo.com> writes:

Georg Wrede wrote:

 So the word "package" is unsymmetric. Should we rename it?

I don't see why. 'package protection' is the phrase commonly used in the 
Java world to refer to the default protection level (i.e. the absence of 
public/protected/private). The package keyword in D makes perfect sense 
to me: this item is visible to other modules in the same package. I see 
your point in that it's a noun akin to class/module, and not an 
adjective as public/protected/private. But it did take a multitude of 
requests to get the feature into the language and I do recall a positive 
reaction when Walter first announced it (in regards to the keyword 
itself as well as the feature). Since one need not declare packages in 
D, it seems an acceptable keyword to me.

Kevin VR <azra pandora.be> writes:

To me it sounds more logical to call it "packaged" in stead of 
"package", because "public", "private" and "protected" are all 
adjectives and "package" is a noun.
I'm not a native english speaker though, so i'm not really sure...

public/private/protected/packaged

Mike Parker wrote:
 Georg Wrede wrote:
 
 So the word "package" is unsymmetric. Should we rename it?

 
 
 I don't see why. 'package protection' is the phrase commonly used in the 
 Java world to refer to the default protection level (i.e. the absence of 
 public/protected/private). The package keyword in D makes perfect sense 
 to me: this item is visible to other modules in the same package. I see 
 your point in that it's a noun akin to class/module, and not an 
 adjective as public/protected/private. But it did take a multitude of 
 requests to get the feature into the language and I do recall a positive 
 reaction when Walter first announced it (in regards to the keyword 
 itself as well as the feature). Since one need not declare packages in 
 D, it seems an acceptable keyword to me.

"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:

"Kevin VR" <azra pandora.be> wrote in message
news:d2n82u$16rc$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 To me it sounds more logical to call it "packaged" in stead of
 "package", because "public", "private" and "protected" are all
 adjectives and "package" is a noun.

We could always call it 'static' <grins>.