[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0119: Remove access modifiers from extensions
laurent.mihalkovic at gmail.com
Sat Jul 16 14:21:59 CDT 2016
To me this is reminicent of what is happening with the T.Type / Type<T> story, where there seems to be a rush to throw a proposal under the cut-off date even if it is ill-prepared, or based on misunderstandinds.
> On Jul 16, 2016, at 7:15 PM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> I tried to tackle the ability to write extensions where everyone would be forced to write access modifier on member level. That’s what I had in my mind all the time. But the respond on this was, as you can see purely negative. :D
> Making all extensions public when there is protocol conformance makes no sense, because you could extend your type with an internal protocol, or the extended type might be not public.
> Anyways, I’m withdrawing this proposal. :)
> Adrian Zubarev
> Sent with Airmail
> Am 16. Juli 2016 um 19:09:09, Paul Cantrell (cantrell at pobox.com) schrieb:
>> Because of all this, I have stopped using extension-level access modifiers altogether, instead always specifying access at the member level. I would be interested in a proposal to improve the current model — perhaps, for example, making “public extension” apply only to a protocol conformance, and disabling access modifiers on extensions that don’t have a protocol conformance.
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution