One bonus it is a real word so autocorrect doesn’t fix it! I checked the dictionary and there are no negative or misleading meaning.
It is a verb though, this is not being used as a verb in this case. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/interfile <http://www.dictionary.com/browse/interfile> > On Mar 30, 2016, at 10:04 PM, Paul Ossenbruggen <pos...@gmail.com> wrote: > > public > internal > interfile > private > > still googleable and very clear its scope and meaning, nice latin root. > Doesn’t overload “private”, slightly shorter. > > >> On Mar 30, 2016, at 9:46 PM, Thorsten Seitz via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >> >> Looks good to me. >> >> -Thorsten >> >>> Am 31.03.2016 um 06:22 schrieb Chris Lattner via swift-evolution >>> <swift-evolution@swift.org>: >>> >>>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 10:13 PM, Chris Lattner <clatt...@apple.com> wrote: >>>> How about we continue this trend, and follow other existing Swift keywords >>>> that merge two lowercase words (associatedtype, typealias, etc), and use: >>>> >>>> public >>>> moduleprivate >>>> fileprivate >>>> private >>>> >>>> The advantages, as I see them are: >>>> 1) We keep public and private meaning the “right” and “obvious” things. >>>> 2) The declmodifiers “read” correctly. >>>> 3) The unusual ones (moduleprivate and fileprivate) don’t use the awkward >>>> parenthesized keyword approach. >>>> 4) The unusual ones would be “googable”. >>>> 5) Support for named submodules could be “dropped in” by putting the >>>> submodule name/path in parens: private(foo.bar.baz) or >>>> moduleprivate(foo.bar). Putting an identifier in the parens is much more >>>> natural than putting keywords in parens. >>> >>> I’ve seen a number of concerns on this list about moduleprivate, and how it >>> penalizes folks who want to explicitly write their access control. I’ve >>> come to think that there is yes-another possible path forward here (which I >>> haven’t seen mentioned so far): >>> >>> public >>> internal >>> fileprivate >>> private >>> >>> The advantages, as I see them are: >>> 1) We keep public and private meaning the “right” and “obvious” things. >>> 2) The declmodifiers “read” correctly. >>> 3) Compared to Swift 2, there is almost no change. The only thing that >>> changes is that some uses of Swift 2 “private” will be migrated to >>> “fileprivate”, which makes the intent of the code much more clear. >>> 4) fileprivate is the unusual and not-really-precedented-in-other-languages >>> modifier, and it would still be “googable”. >>> 5) The addresses the “excessively long” declmodifier problem that several >>> people are concerned with. >>> 6) Support for named submodules could be “dropped in” by parameterizing >>> “internal”. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> -Chris >>> _______________________________________________ >>> swift-evolution mailing list >>> swift-evolution@swift.org >>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >> _______________________________________________ >> swift-evolution mailing list >> swift-evolution@swift.org >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
