Could you please add something to the documentation to clarify the behavior of private base-class-member variables in derived classes? It seems that there's no way to preclude derived classes from accessing a base class' private members? Could the final keyword perhaps be extended for this use-case?
Thank you!
I'll update the manual to clarify the meaning of private members.
Do you really need to prevent a derived class from accessing the base class' member? Can you give a useful example of this so I can consider the worthfullness of implementing it (maybe even change the meaning of 'private' and include 'protected' to be more in line with C++/Java/C# etc).
I'm not sure this is quite as useful for a "scripting" language than one intended for building large scale systems.
This is exactly my point. Many of the design decisions I take for AngelScript are based on the fact that it is a script language, and not really meant for large scale standalone programs. I'm not trying to recreate C++ in scripting form. 
However a potential use might be a modding API, where the game engine might provide some helpful parent classes but wants to maintain a certain amount of hidden state in the script that can be freely changed between versions without breaking client code.
This makes sense.
Disclaimer: I don't use AngelScript so I wouldn't advocate implementing anything just for my theoretical use case!
You covered my use-case pretty nicely :)
Too late, Andreas already implemented all the ideas for all your theoretical cases.
Disclaimer: I don't use AngelScript so I wouldn't advocate implementing anything just for my theoretical use case!
I've corrected the meaning of private class properties in revision 2098. Now a derived class cannot access the private properties of the base class,
I've corrected the meaning of private class properties in revision 2098. Now a derived class cannot access the private properties of the base class
Since this has backwards-compatibility implications, would you consider making this the new default, but adding an engine option to make old behavior an error or to emit a warning?
Thanks!
