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

Jeremy Pereira jeremy.j.pereira at googlemail.com
Fri Dec 2 11:20:18 CST 2016

> On 2 Dec 2016, at 15:44, Benjamin Spratling <bspratling at mac.com> wrote:
> I see where you're going with that.  So it's an artifact from Java and C++, too?  :)
> I was recently doing a review of music notation, and one of the problems is that it has multiple ways of doing exactly the same thing.  Anyone trying to read a given piece of music has to learn all of them, making the problem multiple times harder than necessary.
> We already have a way to enforce "you need to implement this" in Swift, and it's with protocols.  Personally, I'd rather see us move in that direction.

I have no preference one way or the other except I am against the proliferation of access modifiers for methods and properties. I was just drawing people’s attention to the fact that the specific requirement of super classes enforcing that subclasses implement certain methods has already been discussed and the method proposed at the time has apparently not yet been rejected. 

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list