<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="">On Mar 23, 2017, at 2:22 AM, Matt Gallagher via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">I can't help but feel that this proposal is really misdirected frustration. Programmers who don't use clusters of tiny types in a single file shouldn't care about the existence of a scoped access modifier because it shouldn't affect them – they should use file access modifiers and be done. Yet apparently, it is file access modifier advocates pushing this proposal.</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">It is equally frustrating that those on the opposite side of this proposal keep indicating “just don’t pay attention to it” is an acceptable answer to the language growing an entire axis of confusion to its access control (i.e., a wart) so early in its life.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class=""><div class="">Sincerely,</div><div class="">Zachary Waldowski</div><div class="">Sent from my Mac</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></body></html>