Perhaps it's because I'm not a native English speaker, but interfile doesn't read well at all to me whereas fileprivate is crystal-clear.
> On 31 Mar 2016, at 08:21, T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > public > internal > (fileprivate | interfile) > private > > Either choice is fine with me > >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Jesse Squires via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> I really like this. +1 for the following: >> >> public >> internal >> fileprivate >> private >> >> -Jesse >> >>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 10:13 PM, Chris Lattner <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > How about we continue this trend, and follow other existing Swift >>> > keywords that merge two lowercase words (associatedtype, typealias, etc), >>> > and use: >>> > >>> > public >>> > moduleprivate >>> > fileprivate >>> > private >>> > >>> > The advantages, as I see them are: >>> > 1) We keep public and private meaning the “right” and “obvious” things. >>> > 2) The declmodifiers “read” correctly. >>> > 3) The unusual ones (moduleprivate and fileprivate) don’t use the awkward >>> > parenthesized keyword approach. >>> > 4) The unusual ones would be “googable”. >>> > 5) Support for named submodules could be “dropped in” by putting the >>> > submodule name/path in parens: private(foo.bar.baz) or >>> > moduleprivate(foo.bar). Putting an identifier in the parens is much more >>> > natural than putting keywords in parens. >>> >>> I’ve seen a number of concerns on this list about moduleprivate, and how it >>> penalizes folks who want to explicitly write their access control. I’ve >>> come to think that there is yes-another possible path forward here (which I >>> haven’t seen mentioned so far): >>> >>> public >>> internal >>> fileprivate >>> private >>> >>> The advantages, as I see them are: >>> 1) We keep public and private meaning the “right” and “obvious” things. >>> 2) The declmodifiers “read” correctly. >>> 3) Compared to Swift 2, there is almost no change. The only thing that >>> changes is that some uses of Swift 2 “private” will be migrated to >>> “fileprivate”, which makes the intent of the code much more clear. >>> 4) fileprivate is the unusual and not-really-precedented-in-other-languages >>> modifier, and it would still be “googable”. >>> 5) The addresses the “excessively long” declmodifier problem that several >>> people are concerned with. >>> 6) Support for named submodules could be “dropped in” by parameterizing >>> “internal”. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> -Chris >>> _______________________________________________ >>> swift-evolution mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >> >> >> >> -- >> Jesse Squires >> >> blog | jessesquires.com >> github | github.com/jessesquires >> hexedbits | hexedbits.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
