There is nothing preventing you from using fileprivate if you want to write
your code in this style. At most you can complain that you don't like the new
keyword. But you're not losing any functionality so I don't understand why you
say you are "missing" something.
Sent from my iPad
> On Jun 29, 2016, at 1:25 AM, David Hart via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
>
>> On 29 Jun 2016, at 04:03, Matthew Judge <matthew.ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If I understand SE-0025 (even with the amendment) you can still spell the
>> access modifier to types as 'private' and get the same characteristics as
>> the pre-SE-0025 meaning or private, so I'm not sure I understand the concern
>> here. However (continued below)
>
> The characteristic I will be missing is for the following style of writing:
>
> class MyViewController : UIViewController {
> private var privateInfo: String?
> }
>
> //MARK: Public
>
> public extension MyViewController {
> func publicFunction() {
> // CAN’T ACCESS privateInfo
> }
> }
>
> //MARK: UITableViewDataSource
>
> private extension MyViewController : UITableViewDataSource {
> func numberOfRowsInSection(_ section: Int) -> Int
> // CAN’T ACCESS privateInfo
> }
> }
>
> //MARK: Private
>
> private extension MyViewController {
> func implementationFunction() {
> // CAN’T ACCESS privateInfo
> }
> }
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
