Hello, Tino! Thanks for your feedback.
I do suggest an alternative, in which *typeprivate *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. I should not be accessed from another module, since that's what *internal* is for. *typeprivate *would still create a private context. Best, Gonçalo 2016-11-29 16:16 GMT+00:00 Tino Heth <[email protected]>: > As you pointed out, Swift already has quite a lot access levels… > 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: > Should it be possible to access typeprivate data from another module in an > extension or subclass? > > - Tino
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
