Re: [swift-evolution] Should we rename "class" when referring to protocol conformance?

> Personally I have always felt “class” was an oddball special case here that's unneeded because we have a perfectly good protocol that means the same thing: AnyObject. +1 Repurposing the `class` keyword to constrain a protocol to reference types has always felt awkward, out-of-place, and

Re: [swift-evolution] SE-0025: Scoped Access Level, next steps

I really like this. +1 for the following: public internal fileprivate private -Jesse On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > On Mar 23, 2016, at 10:13 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > How about we continue this