> On 21 Jul 2016, at 10:20, Robert Widmann <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Simple! You don't need to hide the others if we enforce a rule that >> explicitly mentioning one in the current file imports that name as a >> fileprivate identifier which shadows the ones not explicitly mentioned: > > What you're describing is making a distinction between an open module and an > imported module and is both additive and out of scope for this particular > proposal. We didn't want to touch module re-exports until that proposal came > up later. This is a fantastic idea that we have plans to incorporate in > there nonetheless. This distinction is far more powerful than our current > approach of just opening every module that gets imported into the top level > namespace.
Cool, thanks for the feedback. Now, is there a reason to consider any of this before Swift 3's timeframe? Isn't this all additive? In any case then, I'll hold that proposal back until Swift 3's scope has been fixed. — Pyry
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
