Difference between revisions of "Language design discussions"
m (Canonical forum link - http://forum.dlang.org/help#canonical) |
(Revert accidental deletion) |
||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
* [http://forum.dlang.org/thread/iakfgxjlfzrbxerxpria@forum.dlang.org Initial thread that has raised this topic] | * [http://forum.dlang.org/thread/iakfgxjlfzrbxerxpria@forum.dlang.org Initial thread that has raised this topic] | ||
* [http://forum.dlang.org/thread/llizpsrachdtqtshppud@forum.dlang.org Follow-up about current state of affairs] | * [http://forum.dlang.org/thread/llizpsrachdtqtshppud@forum.dlang.org Follow-up about current state of affairs] | ||
| + | * [[Access specifiers and visibility]] - combined data to make a decision upon | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Proposal ===== | ||
| + | [[DIP22]] | ||
=== auto ref === | === auto ref === | ||
Revision as of 15:02, 2 February 2013
D is an evolving and complex language. New features are proposed, unexpected interaction in old ones get found, design issues are raised. All this may involve hard debates in D newsgroup and if often forgotten. This page serves as an index for major design discussions and proposals.
Main DIP index
Discussed design issues and free-form proposals
Properties
Description
Initial @property design has issues. How can it be changed or even discarded at all?
Thread
- Initial discussion where this topic has rised
- Walters follow-up with proposal to kill property, most info here
Essential moments
Proposals
Access specifiers and symbol visibility
Description
Currently there is feature like "static global" in C or "unnamed namespace" in C++. Access specifiers for module-level symbols control access, not visibility. Ability to hide symbols needs to be added without breaking current access system.
As a result of discussion, Walter has asked for DIP on this topic.
Essential moments
Thread
- Initial thread that has raised this topic
- Follow-up about current state of affairs
- Access specifiers and visibility - combined data to make a decision upon
