> On Mar 26, 2017, at 11:57 AM, David Sweeris via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > On Mar 26, 2017, at 08:50, David James via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: > >> • What is your evaluation of the proposal? >> -1 as written (see below) >> >> • Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to >> Swift? >> Not as written >> >> • Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? >> It does in terms of apparent simplicity, but not in terms of practicality. I >> like to think of Swift as a practical language that does not sacrifice >> utility for apparent simplicity. >> >> • If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how >> do you feel that this proposal compares to those? >> Can’t be compared. Swift has already set a precedent by making “private” >> mean something non-traditional (pre SE-0025), and I think it was a good >> decision, taking us away from the idea that private is only useful with >> parent inheritance structures. >> >> • How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, >> or an in-depth study? >> Have been following it since SE-0025, the aftermath, extensive experience >> using the modifiers in framework code I write and reading all related >> threads on SE. >> >> *** >> >> I propose instead that we revise to use Alternative #3, per Vladimir’s >> comment and revision. >> >> Revised version: >> >> “3. Revert private to be file-based and introduce the scope-based access >> level under a new name (e.g.: scoped, local, etc), provided that the >> scope-based access modifier is not used at the top level of the file.” >> (addendum via Vladimir’s revised comment) > > Yeah, within reason, I couldn't care less how "private"/"fileprivate" are > spelled. What I'm against is removing the functionalityof the current > "private" without simultaneously providing a semantically equivalent > replacement.
I’ll second that. Don’t care what the scoped access modifier is called, as long as there is one. Charles
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
