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

Xiaodi Wu xiaodi.wu at gmail.com
Fri Mar 25 19:07:12 CDT 2016

I like that very much. I like that all four access levels are
described by single words, that they are adjectives, that they obviate
the "private private" problem described by Jordan, and that their
relative level ordering is (IMO) obvious by the usual meaning of the

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via
swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> I honestly still think "public, internal, private, local" is a better taxonomy.. It's true that "internal" and "private" aren't automatically ordered relative to each other (and maybe not even "local"), but they're all adjectives (unlike "module" and "file"), and they're not awkward to read or to use in conversation. But both the core team and the list disagree, mainly because (a) it aligns 'private' more closely with other languages, and (b) if you're not thinking about it, more restrictive is better than less. (Both of which I agree are good ideas.)
> If we're not married to "private" being the most private access level, I think there is a word that implies more privacy than "private": "secret". Something that's private is often still shared with trusted people, but something that's secret is very carefully protected indeed. "Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead."
> So then our four access levels would be:
> * public
> * internal
> * private
> * secret
> --
> Brent Royal-Gordon
> Architechies
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list