[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0119: Remove access modifiers from extensions
laurent.mihalkovic at gmail.com
Sat Jul 16 22:30:29 CDT 2016
> On Jul 16, 2016, at 9:35 PM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> Wrong thread ;) If you think it’s ill-prepared than provide some feedback instead of just watching and waiting to throw negative feedback during review process.
> There is a lot done, but it’s not visible to the public thread yet. Will be soon (by tomorrow I’d guess).
A question i regularly ponder on with modern opensource is how it went so fast from stallman writting gcc to today's anything-goes, where there seems to be an expectatation that throwing even the worst unfinished piece of code in the public should implicitely gag others, and only compel them to have to fix it.
There has always been great as well as ludicrous ideas in the history of mankind, and it would be a rare privilege of the opensource movement that the latter ought not to be singled out as such, and have them become by their mere presence in the public, everyone's responsibility to improve upon.
This proposal was based on a lack of understanding of extensions. My understand of the process is that the initial discussion phase is there to evaluate an idea leaving, only the promissing ones reach proposal stage.
> Adrian Zubarev
> Sent with Airmail
> Am 16. Juli 2016 um 21:21:59, L. Mihalkovic (laurent.mihalkovic at gmail.com) schrieb:
>> 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.
>> (From mobile)
>> 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
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution