Should Adept support private and protected access modifiers?

[ghost]

Everything is public is against the concept of encapsulation in OOP.

[IsaacShelton]

I'm not entirely convinced that field access modifiers provide much value.

The concept of preventing access to certain fields or methods is not present in Adept.

If you want to access something, you can access it.

private/protected symbols are just made harder to access.

e.g.

struct Person (name String, internals struct (age int, occupation String))

func main {
    person Person
    person.name = "John"
    person.internals.age = 34
    person.internals.occupation = "Worker"
}

Ideally though, I think private and protected are useful in some cases and would be implemented in a way where you could use explicit syntax to violate them if absolutely necessary. e.g.

// Conceptual code

struct Person (name String, private age int, private occupation String)

func main {
    person Person
    person.name = "John"
    person!.age = 34 // Example of explicit syntax to violate rules. Normal access is an error
    person!.occupation = "Worker" 
}

Also before field access modifiers, I think that module/namespace level access modifiers have a much greater impact. Ideally these would be added sometime in the future along with field access modifiers.

[IsaacShelton]

Also part of the reason why access modifiers aren't supported, is because Adept doesn't really have the idea of closed classes.

You can create first-class methods at anytime:

struct Dog (name String)

func bark(this *Dog) {
    print("Bark")
}

func main {
    dog Dog
    dog.bark()
}

which complicates the private/protected rules

[ghost]

I will stop treating Adept as another C++ or Objective C but an enhanced version of C. Everything in C is public. Thank you for your clarification. This is only a question and I don't ask you to add the feature. Please make it clear. Most of the threads I posted are simply questions but not suggestions. When I really asking for a feature, e.g: a binding generation tool, I will clearly state that it's a feature request.