> On Jul 16, 2016, at 12:59 AM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > * What is your evaluation of the proposal? > > This is improved from the previous iteration. The code example needs > updating, as both instances of `open func bar()` should be `public open func > bar()` as outlined in the Proposed Design section.
Good catch. I'll fix this. > * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? > > Yes, mostly. There is one comment in the code example that describes a > restriction which does not fit with the direction of Swift. It is not the > main focus of the proposal but I think should be changed. Namely, the > proposal comments: > > "[The declaration `[public] open func bar()` inside a class not marked > `open`] raises a compilation error: a method can't be marked `open` if the > class it belongs to can't be subclassed." > > This is discordant with the direction resolved by the core team in the > SE-0025 revisions, where it was stated with regard to access modifiers: > > "The compiler should not warn when a broader level of access control is used > within a type with more restrictive access, such as `internal` within a > `private` type. This allows the owner of the type to design the access they > would use were they to make the type more widely accessible." > > Applying the same rationale here would suggest that the compiler should not > raise an error if a method is marked `open` inside a non-`open` type, in > order to allow the owner of the type to design as though to make it > subclassable without actually having to do so. That's true. We'll consider this. John. > > * If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar > feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those? > > Yes, I've used OOP in other languages. As discussed, this approach is > different from that taken by many of those but is a deliberate step. > > * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick > reading, or an in-depth study? > > Followed the discussion, read proposal carefully. > > > More information about the Swift evolution process is available at > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md> > > Thank you, > > -Chris Lattner > Review Manager > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> > > _______________________________________________ > 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
