Brendan Eich (2013-04-29T16:47:25.000Z)
David Bruant wrote:
> Le 29/04/2013 18:09, Brendan Eich a écrit :
>>  Users want class-private (and module-private?) syntax.
> I'm not up-to-date on the module work, but last I looked at it, 
> "module private" is everything except what is explicitly exported, no? 
> (which is a good thing, I believe)

This isn't clear for nested modules, or wasn't when they were discussed 
last.

The big win of private as a declarative keyword would be its short-hand 
for const _ = Symbol(), combined with checked uses on right of @.

/be
github at esdiscuss.org (2013-07-12T02:26:56.528Z)
David Bruant wrote:
> Le 29/04/2013 18:09, Brendan Eich a ?crit :
>>  Users want class-private (and module-private?) syntax.
> I'm not up-to-date on the module work, but last I looked at it, 
> "module private" is everything except what is explicitly exported, no? 
> (which is a good thing, I believe)

This isn't clear for nested modules, or wasn't when they were discussed 
last.

The big win of `private` as a declarative keyword would be its short-hand 
for `const _ = Symbol()`, combined with checked uses on right of `@`.