[swift-evolution] SE-0025: Scoped Access Level, next steps

[Erica Sadun]

> On Mar 25, 2016, at 10:57 AM, Tino Heth via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>> These are special cases — both file-private and module-private is something that is fairly unusual
> 
> afaics this is the third time someone mentions that "file-private" is uncommon — so I think it's time someone dissents:
> That statement is at least subjective… right now, "file-private" is one of three access levels, and I wouldn't dare to say either is more or less important than the others.
> 
> I never encountered situations with the current model where I missed a new "private"-level, and maybe "private" will become fairly unusual for the code I'll be writing.
> 
> In my existing code, the new meaning of private wouldn't break much, but the current meaning doesn't hurt me, and there are cases where "file-private" is needed.
> 
> None the less, I don't care much about the "ugliness" of "fileprivate" — but not because I perceive it as unusual:
> I just expect that code completion will do the typing for me, so maybe "f" will be all I have to write (half the characters of "pr" ;-)

I cannot come up with a single use-case in my code for fileprivate and would love
some real world examples where you'd want visibility in a single file but not across
an entire module.

The fileprivate behavior has been a bugaboo of mine for some time, particularly in 
playground use. 

As far as I'm concerned, the control I really want is public,  intra-modular, private, and 
private-even-to-extensions-and-subclasses. I assume the latter is a no-go.

-- E