pnkfelix: do you want to mention the .. on the issue, or should I? IMO even if there is 0 surface syntax it would make the implementation nicer
pnkfelix
eddyb: why don't use, assuming you grok what I was getting at?
eddyb: sorry, i meant "why don't you [mention .. on the issue]"; feel free to just cut-and-paste what I wrote on the etherpad
eddyb
thanks
pnkfelix
eddyb: I am hesitatnt to write the comment myself since I will be AWOL and thus unable to add clarifications
(and participate in debate, etc)
scott joined the channel
arielby has quit
SilverKey has quit
tm has quit
(actually I guess technically i'll be AWL)
eddyb
nmatsakis, pnkfelix: I'll try to rewrite the RFC over the weekend or something. I *do* need to keep something like the "lees public" rule, but it will be much simpler: assuming private is pub(self), a pub(X) item can refer to a pub(Y) item iff X is contained in Y
and only the definition visibility matters *after* expanding self to the enclosing module and whatnot