O language designers, don't make use of "private"/"protected" items a hard error. Make it a warning, at worst, or preferably just make "private" a kind of documentation of intent: http://funcall.blogspot.com/2019/12/i-think-you-left-something-out.html …
-
-
Replying to @leastfixedpoint
How do you feel about closed-over variables?
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @samth @leastfixedpoint
I strongly disagree with this, by the way. A common misconception is that private is just a lint. In reality it’s a qualifier that affects *name resolution*.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
So long as I can access it when I need to, I don't care if I have to spell the access differently.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @leastfixedpoint @samth
I’m not sure being able to access private fields at all is worth it. You massively increase the scope of the fragile base class problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Again: Never mess with name resolution.
3:47 PM - 12 Dec 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.