Let’s use some code to illustrate things.
// FooUtilities.swift
//
// -module-name=Foo
// module Foo {
// Defines Foo.Utilities
module Utilities {
internal func visibleInThisSubmodule() {}
}
//}
// FooUtilities+MoreUtilities.swift
extension Foo.Utilities {
private func privateHelper() {
visibleInThisSubmodule()
}
}
> On Feb 21, 2017, at 10:31 PM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Robert Widmann <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Once again, internal is your keyword. An extension allows you to “open and
> expand” the module boundary here, which is exactly what you want here - to
> extend this module across file boundaries without showing your cards to an
> external consumer of your framework.
>
> Sorry, I don't understand. Does your design support the use case below? I
> don't think it does. Are you replying that supporting the use case below is
> not a goal of your proposal? If so, please just say so.
>
>
>> On Feb 21, 2017, at 10:26 PM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Robert Widmann via swift-evolution
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Sorry, been replying to multiple sub-threads today.
>>
>>
>> For bar(), because you wish to be able to
>>
>> 1) Not export it across the outermost module boundary
>> 2) But still use it internally
>>
>> Internal access is required. Any higher and you would export (violating 1),
>> any lower and you wouldn’t be able to internally import (violating 2).
>>
>> For baz(), because you wish to be able to
>>
>> 1) Not export it across the outermost module boundary,
>> 2) Or even your own internal submodule boundary
>>
>> 3) But still use it within the same submodule, across different file
>> boundaries: this is the feature that many people have stated they want to
>> emerge out of a submodule design.
>>
>> Private or fileprivate suffices depending on the scoping you wish for it to
>> have within the file/interface it’s a part of relative to the other APIs in
>> the submodule.
>>
>> > On Feb 21, 2017, at 10:04 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon <[email protected]
>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I specified two different behaviors for `bar()` and `baz()`. I see now
>> > that you describe `internal` as having the behavior I want for `bar()`. Is
>> > there a way I can get the behavior I want for `baz()`?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Brent Royal-Gordon
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> > On Feb 21, 2017, at 6:51 PM, Robert Widmann <[email protected]
>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>> What access modifiers do I put on `bar()` and `baz()` so that `MyMod`
>> >>> can access `bar()` but not `baz()`, and code outside `MyMod` can access
>> >>> neither `bar()` nor `baz()`?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> internal
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
>
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
