Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 16, 2017, at 8:36 PM, David Sweeris via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > >> On Feb 16, 2017, at 14:34, Slava Pestov via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >> >> While we’re bikeshedding, I’m going to add my two cents. Hold on to your hat >> because this might be controversial here. >> >> I think both ‘private’ and ‘fileprivate’ are unnecessary complications that >> only serve to clutter the language. >> >> It would make a lot more sense to just have internal and public only. No >> private, no fileprivate, no lineprivate, no protected. It’s all silly. > > Eh, I've used `private` to keep myself honest in terms of going through some > book-keeping functions instead of directly accessing a property. This is exactly the kind of thing I like it for and why I hope we might be able to keep scoped access even if it gets a new name that ends up as awkward as fileprivate (allowing private to revert to the Swift 2 meaning). > > - Dave Sweeris > _______________________________________________ > 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
