> Well, anyways, with Swift 3 it no longer is as simple as it is in Obj-C. New 
> modifiers were introduced by request. I feel it's good and means everybody 
> agrees Obj-C modifiers aren't sufficient for Swift.
Well… no ;-)
I'm not sure if there is a single thing in the universe where really everybody 
agrees on — right now, there is nothing more than a small group that has a 
vague agreement that there is room for improvement with the current access 
levels; most Swift users aren't even aware of this discussion at all (and most 
likely never will be ;-)
[In situations like this, I really dislike the restrictions of this medium… 
with something like a Wiki, it would be much easier to set up a table so that 
we could at least collect the opinions from the people discussing now.]

> What I mean, initial arguments should apply no more and I hope Apple will not 
> be too rigid with current status.
I agree on the latter — but it might be the case that fundamental changes to 
Swift won't be considered anymore

> What I mean, though, the new introductions of access modifiers feel quite 
> some "patchy".
Yes… but imho your suggestion which adds additional levels makes it even more 
patchy:
"protected" might be familiar to some developers, but "inner" is just a new 
magic word tacked onto the language.
For me, this is actually the worst direction to take: Adding more and more new 
modifiers instead of really rethinking the topic from scratch.


_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to