<div dir="ltr">I'm starting to worry about the proposal, too. Any news?<div><br></div><div>- Anton</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-05-31 1:07 GMT+03:00 Антон Жилин <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:antonyzhilin@gmail.com" target="_blank">antonyzhilin@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra">I assume that Core team is scheduling a discussion or already discussing the proposal, and that really takes time in our case.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">In reply to Brent, I think that we can start requiring `public` if (when?) operator visibility levels are added.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">- Anton</div><div><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-05-24 13:53 GMT+03:00 Brent Royal-Gordon <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brent@architechies.com" target="_blank">brent@architechies.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>> > Can you qualify them with module names?<br>
> Right now, I guess, no, although that would be nice to have. I agree that this can be discussed later.<br>
<br>
</span>I wonder if we should force people today to put a `public` keyword on their `operator` and `precedence` (or whatever) declarations, so that when we eventually *do* stop doing the weird global thing we're currently doing, existing code won't break (as much).<br>
<span><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Brent Royal-Gordon<br>
Architechies</font></span></blockquote></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>