Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> I understand the principles that you care.  But visibility are not
> that fragile for most of the cases.  Is there any way that addresses
> name conflict issue AND has no strange visibility issue?

I believe that Rule 4 itself is good and correct, and it mimics how 
private methods are dealt with in most other languages. It allows those 
private methods to be used as "local" utility functions, like you want, 
without inflicting more complicated dispatch logic on all child classes.

I do not understand the need for Rule 3 if Rule 4 is put in place. Rule 
3 seems too far-reaching without much benefit.

- Charlie