[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0159: Fix Private Access Levels

[Matthew Johnson]

> On Mar 23, 2017, at 10:54 AM, Zach Waldowski via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Mar 23, 2017, at 2:22 AM, Matt Gallagher via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>> wrote:
>> I can't help but feel that this proposal is really misdirected frustration. Programmers who don't use clusters of tiny types in a single file shouldn't care about the existence of a scoped access modifier because it shouldn't affect them – they should use file access modifiers and be done. Yet apparently, it is file access modifier advocates pushing this proposal.
> 
> It is equally frustrating that those on the opposite side of this proposal keep indicating “just don’t pay attention to it” is an acceptable answer to the language growing an entire axis of confusion to its access control (i.e., a wart) so early in its life.

I think it’s likely that a non-trivial degree of any confusion is related to the mistake we made in choosing the names.  Both `fileprivate` and `private` include the word `private` in their name.  If we had left `private` alone and introduces scoped access with the name `scoped` I think the difference would have been much more clear to most people who have been confused.

> 
> Sincerely,
> Zachary Waldowski
> Sent from my Mac
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170323/0e797328/attachment.html>