Yes it would be really nice. As Gfk said, most Max code circulating arraound uses the underscore prefix to identify private-like methods or functions.
There's another much more secure approach if you're working with modules you're planning to distribute and support, mixing private types with public types that internally deal with the privates one. It is a fast and a bit dirty approach but it works.
This example shows how to create a class that internally deals with a private class on a module. Module user's won't be able to modify the private data as the public field 'PrivateData' is seen as a 'Object' field from the programs importing the module, as the datatype of this field has been properly set as private.
There's another much more secure approach if you're working with modules you're planning to distribute and support, mixing private types with public types that internally deal with the privates one. It is a fast and a bit dirty approach but it works.
Public Type MyClass Field PrivateData:TMyPrivateClass = New TMyPrivateClass Method DoThis() PrivateData.Privatefield = 4555 PrivateData.AnotherPrivatefield = 534 Privatedata.PrivateFunction(34) End Method End Type Private Type TMyPrivateClass Field PrivateField:int = 0 field AnotherPrivateField:int = 0 Function PrivateFunction(Value:int) ... ... ... End Function End Type Public
This example shows how to create a class that internally deals with a private class on a module. Module user's won't be able to modify the private data as the public field 'PrivateData' is seen as a 'Object' field from the programs importing the module, as the datatype of this field has been properly set as private.