> On Aug 9, 2017, at 3:57 PM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I’d very much in favour of a consistent access modifiers across the whole > language and eliminate exclusive `open`. `open/public` protocols are more > than welcome. Plus it’s already has been said that Swift will potentially > support subtyping for value type in some future, where we’ll yet again would > need to align what `public` and `open` will mean. So I’d appreciate all the > steps that could already be made now to align their meaning as much as it’s > possible to this moment.
I have a proposal for “alternative types,” which can fulfill the “strong typedef” desired feature from C++. Since I changed from a custom initialization interface to RawRepresentable, I can do conditional translation to the new type, i.e. implement subtypes. (It can also do quotient types.) What do you mean by needing to figure out what public/open mean? — Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT mac DOT com
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
