Carl (>>>>), Moritz (>>>), Carl (>>), Moritz (>): >>>> <masak> um, so 'protected' is when the deriving classes can see the >>>> attribute? >>>> <jonalv> yup >>>> <masak> that's what 'private' means in Perl 6. >>> >>> That's wrong. Perl 6's "private" is like Java's "private" - subclasses >>> can't see it. >>> It's just Rakudo being leaky at the moment, not a fallacy of the Perl 6 >>> language. (Yes, we have failing tests for this; no, we don't run them at >>> the moment). >> >> That is indeed reassuring. Thank you. >> >> ...So, how come Perl 6 doesn't have a 'protected' access level? :) > > Exactly for the reasons you brought up against 'protected' as a default: > in encourages people to inherit from a class just to bypass some of the > public API.
Yes, but 'protected' can still be useful in some delimited situations. I wasn't asking why it isn't the default -- I was wondering why it isn't there at all. The conversation we had on IRC (<http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2010-03-23#i_2144261>) seems to indicate that 'protected' can be emulated with the 'trusts' keyword... but that doesn't have any explicit support from the spec, and the 'trusts' keyword hasn't been realized in any Perl 6 implementation so far. // Carl
