> I’ll concede that the proposal makes a claim that might very well be
> disproved. I would very much like to see an actual example of a public class
> that **has** to be public but **shouldn’t** be open for obvious reasons. I
> would happily accept being shown wrong on that point.
This is afaics one of the most active disputes on evolution — and you can save
you a lot of grief by accepting that it is pointless:
The whole discussion isn't based on facts at all, despite many false claims
that marking things as final is generally better.
I have asked for a single example to prove this in the past as well, so I guess
no one can present such a thing to you.
It is personal preference, so arguments don't help much here.
Maybe it helps to know the whole story, as everything started with "final
should be default", followed by a try to forbid subclassing for types from a
different module by default, finally arriving at the current compromise where
you have to decide wether module clients should be allowed to subclass or not.
Nobody ever requested that public should be the only access level, so there has
been only been pressure applied from one direction — it's interesting to see
some backlash now.
Imho people already were quite tired of discussion when public/open was
accepted as a compromise...
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
