[swift-evolution] [Post Swift 3] [Proposal] Introducing `group` mechanism

[L. Mihalkovic]

Regards
(From mobile)

> On Jun 29, 2016, at 7:43 PM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> Am I understanding your feedback right that you’re in favor of this:
> 
> public class func member1() {}
> public class func member2() {}
> public class func member3() {}
> public class func member4() {}
> public class func member5() {}
> Instead of:
> 
> public class group {
> 
>     func member1() {}
>     func member2() {}
>     func member3() {}
>     func member4() {}
>     func member5() {}
> }
> And you’re argument is ‘scrolling back’?
> 
No sure i understand your point here. The problem i see with this proposal is that what may look quaint with empty methods in an email will turn into a practicality nightmare with real code. If I recall, there was even a past argument from a core team member (chris?) about something different but alluding to a very similar lack-of-practicality-at-scale.

> 
> Am 29. Juni 2016 um 19:35:35, L. Mihalkovic (laurent.mihalkovic at gmail.com) schrieb:
> 
>> -1 looks like a kludgy hack. 
>> It will force people to have to scroll back to the declaration of a group (with no assistance to find where it is) in order to ascertain the visibility of a given method, while pushing code further to the right for every single method. Couple that with the zealous following of the 80c rules and that makes for a less than stellar coding experience... all in the name of not have to type a modifier.
>> Regards
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160629/f71782cb/attachment-0001.html>