<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Le 19 mars 2016 à 15:35, Dany St-Amant via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> a écrit :</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Le 15 mars 2016 à 09:07, Ilya Belenkiy via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> a écrit :</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">These names are very uniform, and the context is immediately clear, but they are very long. The 2 most commonly used (and spelled out) would be access(global) and access(scope), public and private are much shorter and are well established terms of art.<br class=""></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">An option which goes against Swift being as explicit as possible is to support abbreviated scope, in addition to the full name:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">access(g)</div><div class="">access(m)</div><div class="">access(f)</div><div class="">access(s)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Even knowing about what we are talking about, I got a hard time understanding what each option means.</div><div>Using single letter name is utterly confusing and unreadable.</div><div><br class=""></div></body></html>