on Sun Jul 17 2016, Tino Heth <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > I naturally assumed that "public" and "open" would be two separate > concepts, as it has been expressed that orthogonality* is favored. > But actually reading the proposal, it says: > "open is invalid on declarations that are not also public", which imho > not only is an unnecessary mingling of the two concepts, it also > blocks the option to declare methods that can't be called outside the > framework, which isn't that uncommon in Cocoa (methods like > UIView.drawRect wouldn't show up in autocompletion lists anymore).
One point is to allow the possibility of non-public open methods in the future, even if we know we don't have the time to design or implement them today. > The whole proposal is about limitation whose rationale is > incomprehensible for many, but for this "restriction of the > restriction", I can't see any rationale at all. > > - Tino > > * At class-level, there is afaics no orthogonality planned as well (a > class that is abstract outside its module… might be useful as well) > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution -- Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution