[swift-evolution] Swift evolution proposal: introduce typeprivate access control level

Shawn Erickson shawnce at gmail.com
Fri Dec 2 09:55:57 CST 2016

I think at this point we really need to build a concrete catalog of "warts"
that cause implementation details to leak out of a module to consumers of a
module (by extension submodule). I think that is the first things that
should be looked at when considering making any changes to the access
controls. I have a few code examples that I likely can pull together from
real code that highlights some issues and I bet others do as well.

If we can collect these and look at them more holistically it would be

I think email is likely a week way to do this... hum...

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 7:51 AM Tino Heth via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> Well, anyways, with Swift 3 it no longer is as simple as it is in Obj-C.
> New modifiers were introduced by request. I feel it's good and means
> everybody agrees Obj-C modifiers aren't sufficient for Swift.
> Well… no ;-)
> I'm not sure if there is a single thing in the universe where really
> everybody agrees on — right now, there is nothing more than a small group
> that has a vague agreement that there is room for improvement with the
> current access levels; most Swift users aren't even aware of this
> discussion at all (and most likely never will be ;-)
> [In situations like this, I really dislike the restrictions of this
> medium… with something like a Wiki, it would be much easier to set up a
> table so that we could at least collect the opinions from the people
> discussing now.]
> What I mean, initial arguments should apply no more and I hope Apple will
> not be too rigid with current status.
> I agree on the latter — but it might be the case that fundamental changes
> to Swift won't be considered anymore
> What I mean, though, the new introductions of access modifiers feel quite
> some "patchy".
> Yes… but imho your suggestion which adds additional levels makes it even
> more patchy:
> "protected" might be familiar to some developers, but "inner" is just a
> new magic word tacked onto the language.
> For me, this is actually the worst direction to take: Adding more and more
> new modifiers instead of really rethinking the topic from scratch.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161202/3cc6ede0/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list