[swift-evolution] Pitch: Cross-module inlining and specialization

[Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky]

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Slava Pestov <spestov at apple.com> wrote:

> Thanks for taking a look!
>
> > On Oct 2, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky <
> nevin.brackettrozinsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 3. Even though @inlinable will have no effect on declarations which are
> not public, we should still allow it to be placed there. That way when the
> access level is later changed to be public, the attribute is already where
> it should be. This is similar to why we permit, eg., members of an internal
> type to be declared public, which was discussed and decided previously on
> Swift Evolution.
>
> This is an interesting point. Do you think the attribute should be
> completely ignored, or should the restrictions on references to non-public
> things, etc still be enforced?
>

 Hmm, good question!

I rather like the idea Greg Parker put forth, where non-public @inlinable
items can be used by public @inlinable ones, which implies that the
restrictions should indeed still apply—something @inlinable can only
reference public or @inlinable things.

Nevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20171002/5a5ecdd8/attachment.html>