<div dir="ltr">Hello, Tino!<div><br></div><div>Thanks for your feedback.</div><div><br></div><div>I do suggest an alternative, in which <b>typeprivate </b>replaces file private, since I believe that having the scope of a member limited by file scope does does fall short in fitting a language design purpose, as file is a compiler related construct which could, in turn, be replaced somewhere in time, thus leaving the “fileprivate” access member orphaned.</div><div><br></div><div>I should not be accessed from another module, since that's what <b>internal</b> is for. <b>typeprivate </b>would still create a private context.</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Gonçalo</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-11-29 16:16 GMT+00:00 Tino Heth <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:2th@gmx.de" target="_blank">2th@gmx.de</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">As you pointed out, Swift already has quite a lot access levels…<br>
Comparing the usefulness, "typeprivate" would clearly win over (Swift 3) "private" for me — but it adds a "new dimension" to the game, and I guess this will be a dealbreaker:<br>
Should it be possible to access typeprivate data from another module in an extension or subclass?<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
- Tino</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>