> On 15 Feb 2017, at 11:11, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Our philosophy in general, however, is to default to the behavior which > preserves the most flexibility for the library designer.
Actually, I thought the philosophy was to preserver type safety. When did that change? Also, when was the library designer prioritised ahead of the application developer? > Both open and non-open classes are common, but we chose to give non-open > classes the `public` keyword because that's the flexibility-preserving option. No it isn’t, it’s the flexibility restricting option. The consumer of an open class can subclass it. The consumer of a public class cannot subclass it. How is the second more flexible than the first? _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
