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

Ian Keen iankeen82 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 24 19:16:41 CDT 2017

I missed the other code based modules conversation floating around... this would also be a much better solution imo - dropping fileprivate and having modules with open/public/internal/private seems like it would cover everything one might need without being bound to something like a physical file..


> In terms of black and white, approve or don't approve - I agree with Matt, thumbs down on this one from me too.
> For what it's worth while I also use fileprivate a lot I dislike the concept... I think pairing scope to something physical like a file is weird - but I also believe it is a symptom of a flaw in the tooling.
> If Xcode supported module/framework based development as easily as IDEs like visual studio then fileprivate would never have been needed and internal scope would actually serve a purpose. We would have 'internal' types that can live in their own files but would be invisible to the consumer of the module/framework.
> _That_ would be my hope for access modifiers going forward, but unless Xcode is open sourced I fear that we have to make language compromises like fileprivate which as essentially a crutch imo.
> Ian Keen.

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list