> On 21 Feb 2017, at 11:40, Brent Royal-Gordon <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Feb 20, 2017, at 10:58 PM, David Hart via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The scoped keyword is a good choice not only because the community has been >> calling this feature “scoped access control” all along, but also because the >> principle underlying all of Swift’s access levels is the idea of a scope. > > I think the second part of this sentence undermines the argument for `scoped` > as a keyword: if *all* access levels are about scope, then *this* access > level should not be called `scoped`, because the keyword should describe > what's *different* about this access level. > > That's not to say "scoped" is a bad name, but I think it's good because the > space inside curly braces can be thought of as a "scope". So I'd revise this > sentence to something like: > > The scoped keyword is a good choice not only because the community has > been calling this feature “scoped access control” all along, but also because > a variable's scope is traditionally restrained to the curly-brace-delimited > block the variable is declared in, and that's the behavior `scoped` > implements.
I totally agree with you :) But that’s the part of the proposal that Matthew Johnson is supporting. If you come to an agreement, I’ll update the proposal. > -- > Brent Royal-Gordon > Architechies > _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
