> On Mar 25, 2016, at 9:46, Ross O'Brien <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well, several prominent voices seem to think that 'private' is "intuitively > obvious" when it refers to declaration-level scope, so I didn't argue that > point. I still happen to disagree; I would add 'privatetodeclaration' to > 'privatetomodule' and 'privatetofile', which would solve that conversational > point: "These properties are private to the declaration". > > Alternatively: 'fileaccessible', 'moduleaccessible', 'declarationaccessible'? > (Does that confuse code accessibility with such things as UIAccessibility?)
Just on this point, yes, we've been advised to avoid the word "accessibility" in the past. We're deliberately using "access control" and "access"; "accessible" is kind of on the line. (We're not using "visible" because whether something is "visible" depends on the use site, whereas access level is a characteristic of the declaration only.) Jordan
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
