Mountain wrote:

> If a large framework (or library, application, etc.) has optional parts
> and some users may not want all parts, it would make sense to break the
> framework into separate physical assemblies. However, if internal
> access is specified in the monolithic framework, a problem arises
> because changing internal access to public changes the design
> intention. Something other than public is required, yet internal
> doesn't work anymore (even though the logical design of the code has
> not changed).
>
> The large framework is still logically one unit, but it has been
> physically arranged as two or more assemblies strictly for efficiency
> or flexibility. Why should we not have a way to define an internal
> access level for the _logical_ unit? In an imaginary future version of
> C#, this might be something like the internal access modifier scoped by
> namespace. . .
>
> Is there any way to accomplish what I'm after in C# 2.0? Thanks.

"Mountain" <dshiel@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Why should we not have a way to define an internal
> access level for the _logical_ unit? In an imaginary future version of
> C#, this might be something like the internal access modifier scoped by
> namespace. . .
>
> Is there any way to accomplish what I'm after in C# 2.0? Thanks.