[swift-evolution] private & fileprivate
shawnce at gmail.com
Fri Oct 7 16:42:25 CDT 2016
I do see dislike of the name, I get that, I among others pushed for
alternate naming (kinda preferred keeping "private" at file scope).
What isn't clear to me is - at least for some - folks asking to remove it
what they actually mean... or what confusion actually exists other then
being something new / different then the past. I prefer to not rush to
quickly to remove something because of noise early in the adoption /
availability of Swift 3.
It seems like some folks may not realize the the old "private" basically
changed its name to "fileprivate" without any behavior change in its
"protection" scope. So when voting to remove fileprivate do they want to
lose file scoping as well or are they asking for the new private to change
back to be file scope (e.g. lose the new private scoping). I also have seen
some of the "mocking" of this feature being based on assuming that file
scope was added and serves no purpose when in fact we always had file
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 2:17 PM Zach Waldowski via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016, at 02:08 PM, Shawn Erickson via swift-evolution wrote:
> Also based on what do we really see an issue with the addition of
> fileprivate? It seems more theory then examples of problems in the
> discussions I have seen.
> I've migrated multiple projects, both for my own use and for clients. I've
> taught Swift 3 to my colleagues as we upgrade, and have to help seasoned
> developers through confusion. I've taught Swift 3 to people who don't know
> Swift, and have to help novice developers through confusion. I watch as
> other developers fight this, such as on Twitter, while fileprivate is a
> joke unto its own. That's hardly theoretical.
> Zachary Waldowski
> zach at waldowski.me
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution