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

Ilya Belenkiy ilya.belenkiy at gmail.com
Mon Mar 28 06:05:01 CDT 2016

I'd like to keep "private" to be completely private and not allow class
injection to gain access, but this is an edge case that could be argued
either way. I can definitely live with a pure scoped access  for
consistency and don't want to argue the edge case in a never ending

I think that lexical scope is a well defined concept. The core team
requested only the change in names for access levels. At this point, I'd
like to limit the changes to that. We already had a very long discussion
about all of these topics.

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 10:19 PM Brent Royal-Gordon <brent at architechies.com>

> > I created a pull request with the updated proposal:
> > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/pull/234
> As long as you're updating the proposal, I'd like to suggest you explain
> more explicitly the visibility of members marked with your new access
> level. I know I was surprised that nested types cannot see a parent type's
> members, and I've seen other people in this thread who seem to believe this
> behaves like the classic C++/Java `private`, where extensions can see the
> members. I'm sure you think it's fully specified, but it just seems to be a
> point of confusion.
> --
> Brent Royal-Gordon
> Architechies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160328/6e0d2a62/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list