> - Typeprivate would allow to abandon the odd fileprivate. Access level would > be constrained to swift constructs (structs, classes and extensions) and not > to a compiler artifact (file). Actually, imho fileprivate isn't odd or "unswift"* — it's one of the three original levels, which all rely on the layout of the filesystem ("same file?" and "same folder/module?"). Even if there was a change of mind, fileprivate is still needed for essential things like implementing Equatable.
But I'm not arguing against typeprivate at all (nor against access control in general ;-) - Tino * I tend not to use attributes like "swifty"… most of the time, it just means "I think this is the right choice" _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution