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

Paul Ossenbruggen possen at gmail.com
Wed Mar 30 22:41:03 CDT 2016


Don’t bother me because they seem to be part of the word. The way “nationwide” does, they are made up words but intent is clear.

OK violating my own statement of only having single words, but very short words. How about?

I think this is good too.

> * public
> * moduleinternal
> * internal
> * private

people who insist on always specifying access will either live with it or make one exception. 

> On Mar 30, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> I know that it’s been suggested a while back, but what is/was the reasoning for rejecting:
>> 	• public
>> 	• module (same as internal in Swift 2.2)
>> 	• file (same as private in Swift 2.2)
>> 	• private
> I know; I was one of the people who suggested it. I believe I saw two reasons for rejecting it:
> 1. This might be read as declaring a module/file, or attaching it to a module/file (a la `class func`), rather than scoping it.
> 2. `private` and `public` are adjectives; `module` and `file` are nouns.
> I'm not entirely convinced by #1; #2 could be addressed by using, for instance, `modulewide` and `filewide`. In any case, though, the discussion seems to have moved elsewhere.
> -- 
> 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