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

[David Hart]

Perhaps it's because I'm not a native English speaker, but interfile doesn't read well at all to me whereas fileprivate is crystal-clear.

> On 31 Mar 2016, at 08:21, T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> public
> internal
> (fileprivate | interfile)
> private
> 
> Either choice is fine with me
> 
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Jesse Squires via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> I really like this. +1 for the following:
>> 
>> public
>> internal
>> fileprivate
>> private
>> 
>> -Jesse
>> 
>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 10:13 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>>> > How about we continue this trend, and follow other existing Swift keywords that merge two lowercase words (associatedtype, typealias, etc), and use:
>>> >
>>> >       public
>>> >       moduleprivate
>>> >       fileprivate
>>> >       private
>>> >
>>> > The advantages, as I see them are:
>>> > 1) We keep public and private meaning the “right” and “obvious” things.
>>> > 2) The declmodifiers “read” correctly.
>>> > 3) The unusual ones (moduleprivate and fileprivate) don’t use the awkward parenthesized keyword approach.
>>> > 4) The unusual ones would be “googable”.
>>> > 5) Support for named submodules could be “dropped in” by putting the submodule name/path in parens: private(foo.bar.baz) or moduleprivate(foo.bar).  Putting an identifier in the parens is much more natural than putting keywords in parens.
>>> 
>>> I’ve seen a number of concerns on this list about moduleprivate, and how it penalizes folks who want to explicitly write their access control.  I’ve come to think that there is yes-another possible path forward here (which I haven’t seen mentioned so far):
>>> 
>>> public
>>> internal
>>> fileprivate
>>> private
>>> 
>>> The advantages, as I see them are:
>>> 1) We keep public and private meaning the “right” and “obvious” things.
>>> 2) The declmodifiers “read” correctly.
>>> 3) Compared to Swift 2, there is almost no change.  The only thing that changes is that some uses of Swift 2 “private” will be migrated to “fileprivate”, which makes the intent of the code much more clear.
>>> 4) fileprivate is the unusual and not-really-precedented-in-other-languages modifier, and it would still be “googable”.
>>> 5) The addresses the “excessively long” declmodifier problem that several people are concerned with.
>>> 6) Support for named submodules could be “dropped in” by parameterizing “internal”.
>>> 
>>> Thoughts?
>>> 
>>> -Chris
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jesse Squires
>> 
>> blog | jessesquires.com
>> github | github.com/jessesquires
>> hexedbits | hexedbits.com
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160331/2bbdc93a/attachment.html>