Menu
Search

Forums

Forum Index

Thread overview
Protection in BaseClassList: semantics undefined?
Jan 22, 2009
Harry Vennik
Jan 22, 2009
Frank Benoit
January 22, 2009
Gravatar of Harry VennikPosted by Harry VennikReply
Harry Vennik
Gravatar of Harry Vennik


Reply
Hi,


http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/class.html

In the grammar specification I read that a base class or interface name can be prepended a protection attribute. But I don't find a word about the semantics thereof... Can anyone tell (and update the docs)?


Regards,

Harry
January 22, 2009
Gravatar of Jarrett BillingsleyPosted by Jarrett Billingsley
in reply to Harry Vennik		Reply
Jarrett Billingsley
Gravatar of Jarrett Billingsley
Posted in reply to Harry Vennik


Reply
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Harry Vennik <htvennik@zonnet.nl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/class.html
>
> In the grammar specification I read that a base class or interface name can be prepended a protection attribute. But I don't find a word about the semantics thereof... Can anyone tell (and update the docs)?

As far as most people can tell, it's an artifact from very early on in D's development.  It was probably originally supposed to have MI but that was dropped.  The compiler accepts public/private/protected on the base class but it's useless as it breaks things.
January 22, 2009
Gravatar of Frank BenoitPosted by Frank Benoit
in reply to Jarrett Billingsley		Reply
Frank Benoit
Gravatar of Frank Benoit
Posted in reply to Jarrett Billingsley


Reply
Jarrett Billingsley schrieb:
> As far as most people can tell, it's an artifact from very early on in D's development.  It was probably originally supposed to have MI but that was dropped.  The compiler accepts public/private/protected on the base class but it's useless as it breaks things.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=177