> If Scala style access modifiers were adopted for Swift then a private(file)
> modifier would also be necessary to give the current private functionality.
I could imagine having these options:
public // visible to
all everyone
private(scope-name, scope-name, …) // visible to specified scopes
(plus current scope)
private // visible only
to current scope
scope-name could perhaps be:
* A type name (or Self, which would mimic C++-style private, or perhaps even
C++-style protected depending on how we treat inheritance)
* A module name (or #module for the current module)
* A file name string (or #file for the current file)
And then the default would simply be `private(#module)`.
Alternatively, the parameterized level could be given a different name, like
`internal` or `shared`. If that were the case, then `#module` might simply be
the default.
--
Brent Royal-Gordon
Architechies
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
