On Mar 25, 2016, at 10:37 AM, Kevin Lundberg via swift-evolution
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I use the file-private scope a fair amount for top-level constants that are
> intended to be used within the file, possibly across types. Doing things this
> way is more concise than embedding them as static members in the type itself
> since I don't need to qualify them with the name of the type at the front.
This is a great point, and perhaps should be made more clear. In the
degenerate case of a top level declaration, “private” and “fileprivate” are the
same thing, since the scope that “private” refers to is the whole file.
private let c = 42 // usable within the current file.
private struct X { init(a : Int) {…} } // usable within the current
file.
func foo() {
let thing = X(a: c)
}
-Chris
>
> Kevin Lundberg
> [email protected]
>
>
>
>> On Mar 25, 2016, at 1:11 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 25, 2016, at 10:57 AM, Tino Heth via swift-evolution
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> These are special cases — both file-private and module-private is
>>>> something that is fairly unusual
>>>
>>> afaics this is the third time someone mentions that "file-private" is
>>> uncommon — so I think it's time someone dissents:
>>> That statement is at least subjective… right now, "file-private" is one of
>>> three access levels, and I wouldn't dare to say either is more or less
>>> important than the others.
>>>
>>> I never encountered situations with the current model where I missed a new
>>> "private"-level, and maybe "private" will become fairly unusual for the
>>> code I'll be writing.
>>>
>>> In my existing code, the new meaning of private wouldn't break much, but
>>> the current meaning doesn't hurt me, and there are cases where
>>> "file-private" is needed.
>>>
>>> None the less, I don't care much about the "ugliness" of "fileprivate" —
>>> but not because I perceive it as unusual:
>>> I just expect that code completion will do the typing for me, so maybe "f"
>>> will be all I have to write (half the characters of "pr" ;-)
>>
>> I cannot come up with a single use-case in my code for fileprivate and would
>> love
>> some real world examples where you'd want visibility in a single file but
>> not across
>> an entire module.
>>
>> The fileprivate behavior has been a bugaboo of mine for some time,
>> particularly in
>> playground use.
>>
>> As far as I'm concerned, the control I really want is public,
>> intra-modular, private, and
>> private-even-to-extensions-and-subclasses. I assume the latter is a no-go.
>>
>> -- E
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
