[swift-evolution] Type-based ‘private’ access within a file

[BJ Homer]

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 1:30 PM, David Hart via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> The Core Team has said they will not consider renaming private. End of story.

It sounds like the core team will not consider a code migration that rewrites “private” to “scoped”, because it would cause too much code churn. Do we have confirmation that they would not consider introducing “scoped” without a migration and thus without the attendant code churn? (That is, revert “private” back to its Swift 2 meaning, introduce “scoped” in Swift 4, but don’t perform any automatic migration from “private” to “scoped”.)

If that kind of change is out of scope, then I agree that this proposal is the best remaining alternative. But it’s not the best alternative. It removes the strict “scoped private” without a full replacement, and leaves “fileprivate” as an awkward name the language. It does leave “private” in a more usable state for the common case, which is good. If we have to choose between this and nothing, I choose this. But I would still like to hear from the core team regarding the possibility of introducing “scoped” without a migration (and thus without the code churn they cited as a concern.)

-BJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20170404/1ab58c3a/attachment.html>